Human-Cheetah Conflict

Social Inquiry Project:

This assignment required me to create a synthesis paper drawing from a critical analysis of the available literature, course readings, and various topics covered during the class discussions and in-person days. I need to chose a topic and investigate the human dimensions aspect of that topic. My topic focused on human-cheetah conflict.

This was created in my Human Dimensions of Conservation course in the Summer of 2019.

---

Introduction

Human-wildlife conflict is the most critical threat facing many wildlife species (Dickman, 2010). Human-wildlife conflict is a crucial focus when discussing feelings and attitudes people have towards cheetahs. Lute (2017) mentions that the four most important considerations when it comes to conservation is reducing negative impacts of humans and carnivores, promoting intrinsic value of carnivores, reducing negative impacts of carnivores on people, and an agreement on how carnivores can impact sustainable living.  Most people agree that cheetah populations are declining, but only some mention reasons as to why that is happening. By knowing how people think and feel towards cheetahs, we are taking the first step towards a solution to better protect these cats and all the species in their ecosystem. Cheetahs need and deserve protection so they can roam in their natural habitat without being pushed to the brink of extinction. Humans around the world must do better to help protect apex predators, like the cheetah, because so much depends on them being here in a healthy and stable manner. As an apex predator cheetahs are towards the top of the food chain and help feed other species off of their own hunting behaviors. How people think and feel about cheetahs greatly impacts the severity of human-cheetah conflict. With less than 7,000 cheetahs in the wild and their population decreasing humans must make progress in protecting these cats and allowing them to roam on their native land conflict free (ICUN, 2019).

Research

Deterrent Methods

Deterrent methods are tools that farmers can use to help decrease the chance of losing their livestock, for example the use of fences or lights to scare away a predator. According to McManus (2014), depredation of livestock is the principal cause of human-wildlife conflict . Most predators are wrongly accused of a livestock killing with theft, injury, disease, poor nutrition, or venomous snakes being the real culprit (Pirie, 2017). Several farmers use deterrents to keep their livestock and animals protected from predators like cheetahs. McManus (2014) breaks down how much deterrents cost, the time that goes into each deterrent, and the benefits of each deterrent. Pooley(2016) states that conservationists offer compensation for predated livestock, offer reward payments for coexisting with healthy populations of predators, and they encourage locals to engage in predator- based ecotourism enterprise. I find it interesting that McManus discusses the price of multiple types of deterrents and the best method to use them while Pooley mentions farmers can be compensated for livestock loss. It seems counterintuitive to teach people the best deterrent methods for their farm if they will be compensated for any livestock loss. I understand that for some farmers their livestock is everything and one loss could set them back, however, if we want people to truly care about human-cheetah conflict we must give them the tools to implement without having a backup plan that suggests they do not need to try deterrents because they will get paid either way. The payments of losing livestock does not occur everywhere, it is solely up to the government to decide if and who they compensate. I do believe Pooley is correct and that we should have a system in place where farmers can get paid for livestock loss, but I also think McManus has a strong point in getting farmers to use these deterrents and actively try to deter cheetahs and other predators from partaking in depredation. 

Lute (2017) mentions how the adoption of livestock husbandry and the restoration of wild prey populations can help reduce livestock loss. We can teach people proper livestock husbandry tricks that can help protect livestock but having people accept restoration of wild prey population may be challenging. Suryawanshi (2014) discusses how high livestock losses create an intolerance towards carnivores, and in some cases leads people to believe that complete extermination is the only solution.The threat that large carnivores pose to livestock make it difficult for humans to remain peaceful towards them and want to help protect them (Suryawanshi, 2014). This causes major challenges in trying to decrease human-wildlife conflict and greatly alters people’s perceptions about carnivores. Dickman (2010) mentions that social influence, such as myths, create residual fear of carnivores and the belief that large carnivores, such as cheetahs, are bewitched animals that only kill. Dickman (2010) also discusses the belief that killing a lion leads to the lion’s spirit turning into tree twigs to attack the killer’s enemies. These different cultural beliefs are causing misunderstandings and harm to the large carnivores like the cheetah. Suryawanshi (2014)  discusses how some cultures around the world are accepting of carnivores like Buddhism who live among snow leopards and wolves and continue their belief of being positive. Regardless of beliefs, humans and animals must learn how to coexist in the same land area, but having humans come to an agreement on land use is a challenge in itself. 

Land use and land protection methods

Cheetahs and humans use the same land and that is where conflict begins to increase. Meer (2018) discusses a Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) that subdivides large commercial farms into small scale farms, and how cheetahs are vulnerable to changes in land use. Marker (2003) mentions that Namibia has  the world’s largest remaining population of free-ranging cheetahs with 90% of them found on commercial livestock and gaming farms. Land use and the amount of open land is crucial to the survival of cheetahs and other carnivores. Marker (2003) discusses how cheetahs are labeled as threatened or endangered according to CITES. While  they are a protected animal, they can still be shot to protect one’s life or property (Marker, 2003). McManus (2014) mentions that livestock depredation results in prompt killing of carnivores, with little regard to their status. Since cheetah populations are decreasing in Namibia, where there is the largest cheetah population, it is crucial that humans protect the land so cheetahs can roam freely in their native area. 

Since cheetahs and humans use the same land there is a chance that they run into each other. Marker (2003) discusses that cheetahs have diurnal hunter behaviors which adds to increased visibility of cheetahs. This in turn leads to the misconception that cheetahs are plentiful and are the cause of all the livestock losses. Khorozyan (2017) mentions that persecution by humans drives big cats towards extinction which has led to five out of seven of the large cats to be classified as vulnerable to endangered according to the IUCN Red List. Humans must do more to protect the land cheetahs use, use safer deterrent methods and do more to protect cheetahs overall. With less than 7,000 cheetahs in the wild they are being labeled vulnerable and we must work together to help protect their populations by also protecting their land (IUCN, 2019).

Education

Training and classes from organizations

Marker discusses how the World Parks Congress took steps in 2003 to have communities take ownership and responsibility over assessing and addressing human-wildlife conflict (2015). Dr. Laurie Marker is the executive director of the Cheetah Conservation Fund (CCF) and understands the importance of educating farmers to use different methods to deter cheetahs rather than killing them. CCF and Future Farmers of Africa have teamed up to train 3,000 rural Namibian farmers on how to better handle their conflicts with cheetahs and assist communities in coexisting with cheetahs, they trained over 300 biologists and agriculture officers, and they trained 500 teachers in Botswana alone to teach their students the importance of cheetahs in the ecosystem and how to deter them without killing them (Marker, 2015).  While CCF worked on developing 13 national action plans to protect cheetah range countries they learned that education and economic development are the two most important tools to reduce human-wildlife conflict (Marker, 2015). They conducted surveys designed to determine what communities thought about cheetahs and came to the conclusion that a higher level of education is associated with a greater tolerance of predators (Marker, 2015). 

Lute (2017) conducted a study with conservation professionals to determine what the four most important considerations are when it comes to conservation. The first consideration had  98% of people agreeing that reducing negative impacts of humans and carnivores will help conservation (Lute, 2017). The second consideration had 92% of people in agreement that promoting intrinsic value of carnivores will help reduce human-wildlife conflict (Lute, 2017). The third consideration had 88% of people in agreement that reducing negative impacts of carnivores on people will help increase positive thoughts of carnivores (Lute, 2017). The final and fourth consideration had 54% of people in agreement that sustainable use of carnivores will help the conservation issue of human-wildlife conflict (Lute, 2017). It is wonderful that Lute was able to reduce the problem down into four main considerations that several people agree with, although there was never any mention of solutions or action steps to take to begin working on them. It is believed that with academics they do not come back to the area they studied and share their findings, so the community may have their own solutions that the academic does not know about. I do believe people should be taught all of those considerations and the importance of them, but with no action plan or mention on how to start it is just an agreement on what the problem is without a solution to work on fixing it. Dickman (2010) conducted a similar study where they found three key factors that influence the mismatch between assumptions and actual behavior of people towards carnivores. The three key factors are perceptions of risk, disproportionate responses (different situation than was called in), and social influence (Dickamn, 2010). Although these are three great areas of focus, again there is no mention of a solution or action plan to help reduce the negative thoughts and behaviors and increase the positive thoughts and behaviors. The study focused on people who lived in the area since they deal with predators on a daily basis. 

Morehouse mentions that human-wildlife conflict is a global conservation and management challenge and that mitigation options require methods that are realistic to implement and economically viable for the human communities experiencing conflicts (2017). In order to save the cheetahs, and other large carnivores, we must work on a global scale to help cheetah populations all over the world. During Marker’s study she determined that over 90% of farmers questioned had limited knowledge about the problems facing the cheetah and farmer’s role in the cheetahs long-term survival (2003). Of those same farmers, 40% agreed that wildlife and/or livestock management would reduce human-cheetah conflicts (Marker, 2003). Marker was able to show that farmers who deal with cheetahs had no idea about the dangers cheetahs face and proves Morehouse’s point that human-wildlife conflict in a global conservation issue. 

Citizen science

Meer (2018) conducted a study on the status of Zimbabwe’s cheetah population after land reform and the land use was changed. They did not specifically state what the land was used for, just that it was broken down into smaller land use areas. During the study Meer (2018) decided to create a citizen science section of the study to encourage community members to report cheetah sightings with information about the cheetah(s), such as age, sex, number of cheetahs, date and time of the sighting, and any pictures of the sighting they may have. During the study there were 954 cheetah sightings from community members and 1,403 cheetah sightings from community members chosen to be  citizen scientists and they had 75,000 photos (Meer, 2018). It was a great way to involve the community and for those chosen to become a citizen scientist they took pride and honor in the title and went above and beyond to look for cheetahs and take pictures of them. It makes me wonder if having that title ‘citizen scientist’ makes people feel important and powerful where they create a much larger impact than they would otherwise. With 954 cheetah sightings from the community and an additional 1,403 from citizen scientists, it is a huge increase that I think should be studied more at a later date. Meer (2018) did not mention how many citizen scientists were involved in the study so that could play a role in the increase in cheetah sightings. The study determined that Zimbabwe had a 62% decline in resident cheetah range, and cheetah population decline by at least 85%,  (Meer, 2018). The study broke it down further to determine that 28% of cheetahs resettled elsewhere, 18% of the land was damaged by habitat encroachment, poaching impacted 24% of the cheetah population, 10% of the cheetah population was persecuted by humans, and 13% of cheetahs had competition with other predators (Meer, 2018). The study exposed the communities thoughts about cheetahs and determined that 37% of people in Zimbabwe believed that the cheetah population was increasing because cheetahs give birth to multiple cubs (Meer, 2018). It is very important that these studies show what communities think about cheetahs and provide the correct information. It is true that cheetahs have multiple cubs, but everything mentioned above is a factor in their survival to adulthood and through adulthood. Some cheetahs give birth to only one cub, so having a couple cubs born in one litter and having the above factors does not mean they all make it to adulthood. I think involving the community in citizen science projects will help them gain first hand knowledge and realize yes they may see 200 cheetah sightings but it could be the same five cheetahs, so it is important to explain every detail so the community can grow and understand the importance of protecting the cheetah. The team conducting the research should come back to the area and share the learned data and information with the community so they can be informed and to gain trust with the community. 

Collaboration 

Collaborations can dragistically help improve situations for both humans and animals and help reduce the human-wildlife conflict between them. The best part about collaborations is that they can happen with anyone, local communities, government agencies or non-profit agencies. Lewis (2016) discusses how mobile phone use has impacted and reduced human-wildlife conflict. The study Lewis (2016) conducted determined that 5.4 billion mobile phones are in developing countries and that they lower the barriers of communication and information exchange. Households can use mobile phones to reduce the number and severity of human-wildlife conflict events while communities can use mobile phones to organize events, such as driving away baboons from crop fields (Lewis, 2016). The use of mobile phones during this study was shown to decrease human-elephant conflict because communities were able to communicate faster and more effectively with each other about where the elephant herd is coming from and where they are going (Lewis, 2016). Mobile phones have also made it easier for people to contact the authorities, provide earlier warnings, and created effective coordination to respond to specific events (Lewis, 2016). Unfortunately poachers also use mobile phones to communicate where their target animal is or if authorities are honing in on them (Lewis, 2016). In a more positive light local people are feeling more empowered to report poaching more effectively because they can do so through the mobile phone without anyone else knowing (Lewis, 2016). Cell phones are beginning to play a very crucial role in Africa regarding  the human-wildlife conflict issue. They are also playing a role in how collaborations within communities, between communities, and between authority figures and local community members can become much simpler and more effective in creating a safe place for animals and humans while protecting the animals in Africa. This could help the cheetahs by allowing farmers to know where a cheetah is so they can go out and protect their livestock, or so the cheetah is only counted once in the sense of ‘how many cheetahs are in the area’. 

Conservancies in Namibia are in favor of open fencing because it reduces the effects of habitat fragmentation caused by game- fencing, decreases inbreeding and changes in species, and it decreases the disruption of wildlife migration patterns (Schumann, 2008). Schumann (2008) discusses that conservancies are expected to be models of conservation because they want to do so much to help improve the status of the surrounding species. Schumann (2008) explains that conservancy members need to take more responsibility for their livestock husbandry and wildlife management actions. The management of predators, like the cheetah, are almost completely excluded from most Namibian conservancy plans, and something needs to change to fix that (Schumann, 2008). The conservancy is there for farmers and the local community to lean on and be apart of to know how to best handle situations involving wildlife and how to manage human-wildlife conflict. Schumann (2008) mentions that the conservancy is a model of conservation but also states that conservancy members support game hunting more than non-conservancy members. I find it strange that an organization that wants to help animals and have others take steps to help animals are in support of something that kills animals. Schumann (2008) explains how in Namibia alone in the year 2000, the income for trophy hunting was $118 million in Namibian currency. When trophy hunting generates such large amounts of money it creates so many challenges for organizations, like the conservancies, to have people steer away from trophy hunting and work on protecting these animals that are being hunted. Although it is difficult to talk people into leaving trophy hunting behind when it brings them such a large income. The conservancies are doing a good job at protecting livestock and some animals, but they need to do more to protect carnivores like the cheetah. I think it would be helpful if other organizations, like CCF or Action for Cheetahs in Kenya (ACK), came in and helped motivate the conservancies to move away from trophy hunting and better protection of the large carnivores. Marker (2015) mentions that National Geographic has a big cat initiative and how there is an IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Cat Specialist Group that also adds to the protection of the large cats. Collaborations between any group can greatly impact the protection of carnivores, like the cheetah, in any area and should always be at the top of the list of solutions in decreasing human-wildlife conflict. 

Conclusion

Human-wildlife conflict is a very important topic to focus on when dealing with the protection of animals, like the cheetah. There is a lack of research in the field of human-cheetah conflict and more research is needed to really understand how people think and feel towards cheetahs. As of right now I believe there are a lot of misconceptions about cheetahs, which leads to a lack of interest in their protection them. More collaborations need to be formed to create solutions to decrease trophy hunting, find other means of those communities to make money and protect the animals in their area. We must work together to create solutions for every step we want to make and ensure the survival of the cheetah and other large cats. The only way we can truly decrease human-wildlife conflict is by creating solutions, conducting research, educating communities, and collaborating with everyone who wants to ensure the survival of cheetahs. 

References

Dickman, A. J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: The importance of considering social 

factors for effectively resolving human-wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation, 13, 458-466. doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2010.00368.x

Khorozyan, I., Soofi, M., Soufi, M., Hamidi, A. K., Ghoddousi, A., & Waltert, M. (2017). 

Effects of shepherds and dogs on livestock depredation by leopards (Panthera pardus) in north-eastern Iran. PeerJ. doi:10.7717/peerj.3049

Lewis, A. L., Baird, T. D., & Sorice, M. G. (2016). Mobile phone use and human-wildlife 

conflict in northern Tanzania. Environmental Management, 58, 117-129. doi:10.1007/s00267-016-0694-2

Lute, M. L., Carter, N. H., Lopez-Bao, J. V., & Linnell, J. D. (2017). Conservation 

professionals agree on challenges to coexisting with large carnivores but not on 

solutions. Biological Conservation, 218, 223-232.Doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2017.12.035

Marker, L. (2003). Reducing conflicts between Namibian farmers and cheetahs. International 

Wildlife Management Congress,184-187. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/reedt/Downloads/reducing-conflicts-between-namibian-farmers-and-cheetahs (1).pdf.

Marker, L. L., & Boast, L. K. (2015). Human-wildlife conflict 10 years later: Lessons 

learned and their application to cheetah conservation. Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An International Journal. doi:10.1080/10871209.2015.1004144

Meer, E. V. (2018). Carnivore conservation under land use change: The status of Zimbabwe's 

cheetah population after land reform. Biodiversity Conservation, 27, 647-663. doi:10.1007/s10531-017-1455-0

McManus, J. S., Dickman, A. J., Gaynor, D., Smuts, B. H., & McDonald, D. W. (2014). 

Dead or alive? Comparing costs and benefits of lethal and non-lethal human-wildlife 

conflict mitigation on livestock farms. Fauna & Flora International, 49(4), 687-695. 

doi:10.1017/S0030605313001610

Morehouse, A. T., & Boyce, M. S. (2017). Troublemaking carnivores: Conflicts with 

humans in a diverse assemblage of large carnivores. Ecology and Society, 22(3), 4th 

Ser. Doi: 10.5751/ES-09415-220304

Pirie, T. J., Thomas, R. L., & Fellowes, M. D. (2017). Increasing game prices may alter farmers' 

behaviours towards leopards (Panthera pardus) and other carnivores in South Africa. PeerJ. doi:10.7717/peerj.3369 

Schumann, M., Watson, L. H., & Schumann, B. D. (2008). Attitudes of Namibian commercial 

farmers toward large carnivores: The influence of conservancy membership. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 38(2), 123-132. Retrieved from https://journals.co.za/docserver/fulltext/wild/38/2/wild_v38_n2_a5.pdf?expires=1562523501&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=FE3DFF00A85AA478CE3EA50E074AC72D.

Suryawanshi, K. R., Bhatia, S., Bhatnagar, Y. V., Redpath, S., & Mishra, C. (2014). 

Multiscale factors affecting human attitudes toward snow leopards and wolves. Conservation Biology, 28(6), 1657-1666. doi:10.1111/cobi.12320

The IUCN red list of threatened species. (2019). Retrieved from 

https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/219/50649567