Fig 1 - uploaded by Kevin Wallace
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Lower Zambezi Valley. The study site is depicted by the rectangle in the western half of the Chiawa Game Management Area (GMA) in Zambia. Other abbreviations are safari area (SA) and open area (OA).
Source publication
Context:
Human–wildlife conflict is a global problem and increasing worldwide as people and wildlife compete for limited resources. Conflict between people and crocodiles, especially in Africa, is recognised as a serious problem. The people of the Chiawa Game Management Area are heavily dependent on the Zambezi River for several resources from pota...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... Chiawa GMA is situated in the middle or lower Zambezi region of Zambia, hereafter referred to as the lower Zambezi, and is bordered by the Kafue River to the west and the Lower Zambezi National Park to the east (Fig. 1). The area has a distinct wet season from November to April, followed by a cool and dry season (May-July) and a hot and dry season ...
Similar publications
This paper argues that compassion for wild animals and the humans living alongside them should be integral to wildlife conservation. Nowhere is this more apparent than in predator conservation, and case studies are used to explore the consequences of wild animal attacks for human victims. Some arguments for extending compassionate consideration to...
Human-wildlife conflict occurs when human requirements encroach on those of wildlife populations, with potential costs to both humans and wild animals. As top predators in most inland waters, crocodilians are involved in human-wildlife conflicts in many countries. Here we present findings of a 5-year survey on human-crocodile conflict on the island...
Interactions between people and wild animals often result in negative impacts, and different views on the management of such interactions can lead to conflicts. Both intentional and unintentional negative human–wildlife interactions are increasing problems in many places where people share space with wild animals. Here we focus on negative interact...
Citations
... Nile crocodiles (Crocodylus niloticus) are among the main threats to fisherfolk and riverine communities in Africa [2][3][4][5][6]. It is estimated that hundreds of deadly attacks attributable to this species occur yearly in Sub-Saharan Africa including South Sudan, with a mortality rate ranging between 50% and 100% [7,8]. Nile crocodiles not only pose a direct threat to people and livestock, but they can also indirectly affect the quality of life of people in more remote locations and economically impoverished areas [9]. ...
... Nile crocodiles (Crocodylus niloticus) are among the main threats to fisherfolk and riverine communities in Africa [2][3][4][5][6]. It is estimated that hundreds of deadly attacks attributable to this species occur yearly in Sub-Saharan Africa including South Sudan, with a mortality rate ranging between 50% and 100% [7,8]. Nile crocodiles not only pose a direct threat to people and livestock, but they can also indirectly affect the quality of life of people in more remote locations and economically impoverished areas [9]. ...
Conflicts between human populations and Nile crocodiles are widespread with crocodiles posing significant threats to fisherfolk and riverine communities across r-Saharan Africa. Hundreds of deadly attacks take place annually, and mortality rates may range from 50% to 100%. Attitudes and perceptions towards crocodiles were studied using structured questionnaires among fisherfolk along the River Nile and the Sudd wetlands in South Sudan. Local communities used crocodiles for their meat and skin/leather trades. The meat is regarded to enhance longevity, sexual potency, and protection against witchcraft. Crocodiles are perceived as a main threat to lives and livelihoods as they restrict people’s freedom of movement along water bodies, attack livestock and humans, and devastate fishing equipment. To assess whether responses were influenced by the intensity of crocodile threats, published data on fatal crocodile attacks on humans and livestock were analysed using Generalised Linear Models (GLMs). This analysis indicated a direct link between the number of crocodile attacks and human attitudes. Crocodiles were generally feared and hated, and there was the agreement of the need to destroy breeding habitats. However, some attitudes were complex and nuanced as highlighted by the agreement of local communities on the need to destroy Nile Crocodile breeding habitats on the one hand and the need to establish crocodile sanctuaries as the the preferred strategy to mitigate risks and conflict on the other hand. There is a need for the creation of a crocodile sanctuary in the Sudd wetlands to minimise the risks of illegal hunting and to buffer the increasing pressure on crocodiles due to human population growth and economic upturn after the civil war.
... Moreover, conflict incidents usually reach a peak during the breeding season, as crocodiles are 'hole-nesters', having on-shore dens with extensive guarding, and parents actively defend the nests and the hatchlings (Henkanaththegedara et al., 2023). Globally, such conflict situation between humans and crocodiles is quite common (Wallace et al., 2011;Fukuda et al., 2014;Brien et al., 2017;Brackhane et al., 2018;Das and Jana, 2018;Uluwaduge et al., 2018;García-Grajales and Buenrostro-Silva, 2019;Khan et al., 2020). However, a contrasting situation exists in a few crocodile habitats, where local people peacefully coexist with significant populations of large reptiles (Van Der Ploeg et al., 2011). ...
Animals face several challenges in their natural environment, and to cope with such conditions, they may exhibit contrasting physiological responses that directly affect their overall well-being and survival. In this study, we assessed physiological responses via faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGCM) measurements in free-ranging mugger crocodiles inhabiting diverse habitats in Gujarat, India. We sampled muggers within Charotar, a rural area (Zone A) with local people having high tolerance towards the presence of muggers, and Vadodara, a region having both urban (Zone B) and rural (Zone C) areas with high levels of human–mugger conflict (HMC). Further, muggers in Vadodara live in water bodies that are mostly polluted due to sewage disposal from adjoining chemical industries. To measure fGCM (mean ± SEM, ng/g dry faeces) levels in muggers, scats were collected during both breeding (N = 107 scats) and non-breeding (N = 22 scats) seasons from all three zones. We used captive muggers (a focal enclosure) to biologically validate (via capture and restraint) the selected fGCM assay (11-oxoetiocholanolone assay). We showed a significant (P < 0.05) 11-fold increase in fGCM levels between pre-capture (540.9 ± 149.2, N = 11) and post-capture (6259.7 ± 1150.5, N = 11) samples. The validated assay was applied to free-ranging muggers during the breeding season, and Zone A showed significantly (P < 0.05) lower fGCM levels (542.03 ± 71.3) compared to muggers of Zone B (1699.9 ± 180.8) and Zone C (1806.4 ± 243.2), both zones having high levels of HMC with polluted water bodies. A similar contrast in fGCM levels was also observed during the non-breeding season. Overall, the study demonstrated that fGCM levels in muggers varied across habitats, and such variation could be due to a multitude of ecological factors that the species experience in their immediate local environment. Moreover, high fGCM levels in muggers of Vadodara during both breeding and non-breeding seasons may indicate a condition of chronic stress, which could be maladaptive for the species.
... Some of the largest crocodilians, saltwater crocodiles (Crocodylus porosus) and Nile crocodiles (Crocodylus niloticus), are frequently negatively perceived, either because of potential human attack (e.g. Caldicott et al., 2005;Wallace, Leslie, & Coulson, 2012), or for damage to fishing equipment (Aust et al., 2009). In Amazonia, three species of caimans (M. ...
Humans and large aquatic predators compete for fish and negative interactions are widely reported as ‘human–wildlife conflicts’. When aquatic predators are perceived to damage fisheries or fishing equipment, lethal control can occur. The perceptions and reality of damage are infrequently compared, but this relationship is key to determining how negative outcomes can be mitigated. We examine coexistence between people and six large aquatic piscivores (two caiman, two dolphins, two otters) in Amazonian Peru. We determine the extent of damage to fishing equipment caused by each species and compare this to the amount of damage perceived by fishers. Giant otter populations have recently recovered in some areas, so we expected different perceptions relating to experiences with otters. We trained fishers to complete fishing registers ( n = 278, 1173 h of fishing) to record damage to nets by wildlife. We interviewed 302 people from three sites to determine perceptions of damage by predators, and attitudes towards giant otters. Rates of damage to nets reflected the presence and populations of different aquatic predators at each site, but when present, dolphins and caimans damaged nets more than otters, which rarely damaged nets. People living where giant otters had recently recovered perceived higher relative levels of damage to nets by them and had more negative attitudes about them, compared to people from areas where giant otters had been present for longer, aquatic predators were more abundant, and community resource management was longer‐established. Better knowledge and more experience with a species may lead to more accurate perceptions of damage and increased tolerance. Where humans and animals compete for natural resources, conflict mitigation rarely includes better resource management. If tolerance of predators is greater where predators are common, and resources have not been overexploited, resource management may yield greater gains for stakeholders than other commonly prescribed forms of mitigation.
... A pesar de esto, se han reportado también estrategias para evitar accidentes (y por ende conflictos), pues los trabajos analizados consideran que son "mitigables" (Wallace et al., 2011), mientras algunas personas tienen tácticas para evitarlos. Se reporta que algunos niños dicen nadar en grupo, haciendo mucho ruido o evitando nadar en el centro de los cuerpos de agua donde dicen se concentran los reptiles, aunque también algunas personas evitan directamente lugares donde habitan estos saurios. ...
... Se reporta que algunos niños dicen nadar en grupo, haciendo mucho ruido o evitando nadar en el centro de los cuerpos de agua donde dicen se concentran los reptiles, aunque también algunas personas evitan directamente lugares donde habitan estos saurios. Por otro lado, los accidentes causados por deficiencias estructurales se resuelven con la infraestructura adecuada (Wallace et al., 2011). ...
... Aust et al., 2009) o con adverbios que señalan frecuencia (ej. Wallace et al., 2011). Además, se especifica el tipo de ganado atacado, se mencionan caballos, puercos, aves de corral, siendo el ganado vacuno el de mayor relevancia pues según los autores tiene mayor valor económico, lo cual concuerda con otras investigaciones que señalan lo mismo (Chakanyuka y Utete, 2022;Corvera et al., 2017;Lamarque et al., 2009;Torres et al., 2018); sin embargo, esta aseveración no contempla qué valores no económicos también son importantes en determinar el nivel de conflicto (Dickman, 2010). ...
El resultado de la interacción entre humanos y fauna produce escenarios donde la conservación y el desarrollo local sustentable se comprometen. Aunque es un tema relevante por sus implicaciones, no existen estudios que hayan sistematizado el conocimiento generado con respecto a las especies involucradas y las características del conflicto. Esta investigación, a través de una revisión sistemática de bases de datos y un análisis narrativo de contenido, identifica y analiza el conflicto humano-cocodrilo a nivel mundial en 28 artículos, con base en el origen y tendencia de las investigaciones, especies involucradas y tipo de interacción. La relación conflictiva es explicada a través de aspecto biológicos como la reproducción o dieta del saurio, así como de su crecimiento poblacional o demográfico, pero también de factores ambientales como el nivel de agua o temperatura, se identificaron las repercusiones económicas y para la conservación de las especies asociadas a este conflicto. Dominan los estudios centrados en ataques a humanos, en el continente americano y para la especie Crocodylus acutus. Los efectos del cocodrilo fueron directos (ataque a humanos) e indirectos (daños a la pesca, agricultura, ganadería, mascotas). El conflicto de intereses entre grupos sociales, así como los aspectos ligados a cultura, percepción, religión u otras cualidades sociales, fueron poco abordados por los artículos analizados.
... ocBITE, 2013). However, the absence of properly documented information on crocodile attacks does not mean that HCC should be downplayed (Pooley, 2015). In addition to quantifying the scale of HCC, understanding human communities that live with and are affected by crocodiles is encouraged to promote and support their conservation (Aust et al., 2009;K. L. Wallace et al., 2011;Mudumba, 2011). ...
Wildlife conflicts between people and large herbivores or mammalian carnivores are widely researched in Africa, but there is limited work on human-crocodile conflicts (HCC). In Uganda, conservation efforts have enabled the recovery of the Nile Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) population, yet the expanding human population and activities increasingly overlap with crocodile habitats resulting in negative interactions. This study used a combination of literature review, surveys, and the Nominal Group Technique to investigate the factors underpinning HCC around Murchison Falls Conservation Area. Results indicate that 115 attacks on humans occurred during 2012–2017, 84.3% of these being fatal. Also, 93.1% of the attacks occurred as victims were either fishing or collecting water. Construction of crocodile exclusion enclosures and translocation of problem crocodiles to protected areas were the most preferred mitigation measure. To reduce the prevalence of human injuries and offset local hostility toward crocodiles, conservation actors need to actively engage the affected communities.
... Understandably, many fishermen fear for their lives. Therefore, fishing is a high risk activity, just like in other continents (Das and Jana, 2018;Wallace, Leslie, & Coulson, 2011). Some fishermen have doubts about pursuing this activity, while others are angry: "I would like to pull out a gun and just kill it." ...
... Therefore, he prefers to keep the catch alive in a burlap bag that he ties loosely to his body, keeping it in the water all the time. This is how he avoids the risky behavior followed by other fishermen who keep dead fishes close to their chest (Pooley, Siroski et al., 2021;Wallace et al., 2011). ...
Objective: To analyze the relationship between the fishermen of central western Mexico and the river crocodiles (Crocodylus acutus), emphasizing the resulting conflict. Design/Methodology/Approach: The work was carried out with 22 fishermen from the Cuyutlán and Alcuzahue lagoons in Colima, Mexico. Four participative workshops were organized per community, in order to explore the positive and negative aspects of the relationship, the perception and knowledge about the ecosystem functions of the crocodile, and the management practices and actions associated with this relationship, as well as to determine the natural participants and factors that influence the said relationship. The workshops were recorded and the resulting data was subjected to a narrative analysis and a summary. Results: Harmonious relationships are recorded, including the creation of bonds between humans and crocodiles and recognizing the benefits to fishing and the ecosystem function of the crocodile. The conflictive relationships identified were related to fishing, the reduction of fishing resources, and accidents. The strategies used to prevent conflicts are related to the dangerous zones, the behavior of the crocodiles, and the killing of the animals to reduce their presence. Additionally, compensation schemes, a collective management of fishing resources, and the replacement of fishing by the exploitation and capture of the crocodile were taken into consideration. Study Limitations: Besides the fishermen’s, the point of view of other participants should be determined. Conclusions: The relationship between fishermen and crocodiles is both harmonious and conflictive. On the one hand, both receive benefits; on the other hand, fishermen suffer economic, operative, and life style impacts, which create inauspicious scenarios for the conservation of the reptile.
... Managing the issues that emerge as a result of wildlife presence and/or behavior, better known as humanwildlife conflicts, is complicated by the interwoven nature of human and wildlife interests, particularly resources. Crocodilian and human dependence on water sources serves as a backdrop to many human-crocodilian conflicts (Wallace et al., 2011, Pooley, 2021. Water is an essential resource for North Rupununi communities who rely on rivers and ponds as a source of food, livelihoods, and cultural importance. ...
... However, our results showed that male respondents were more likely to retaliate to black caiman presence. The observed differences between the genders' attitudes towards black caiman may be explained by risk perceptions of carnivores (Alexander et al., 2015;Wallace et al., 2011). Professions or gender roles that require increased time spent on the water generally faced higher mortality from crocodilians (Das & Jana, 2017;Sideleau et al., 2017). ...
Recovering populations of large carnivores impact the people that live alongside them, sometimes leading to conflict and lethal retaliation. One such carni-vore, the black caiman (Melanosuchus niger) has been implicated in the destruction of fishing equipment, depredation of livestock and pets, and attacks on humans. In order to understand how various stakeholder groups are affected by the negative impacts of living alongside caiman, and their resulting attitudes and behaviors towards caiman, we conducted semistruc-tured interviews in seven Indigenous communities in southwestern Guyana from November 2017 to October 2019. We used logistic and ordinal regression to identify demographic indicators of fishing behavior and factors that are associated with negative attitudes and antagonistic behavior. Loss of pets in addition to an effect of gender, rather than competition overfishing resources (as hypothesized) may drive conflict between Indigenous communities and black caiman. We propose site differences, such as ecotourism may affect attitudes about and behavior towards caiman. The presence of impacts on communities and retaliatory behavior indicates that human-wildlife and wildlife-human impacts involving black caiman may be a concern for the recovery of the species' populations, and the communities that coexist with them. K E Y W O R D S attacks, black caiman,
... Crocodilians were poorly represented in our data. This result was unexpected, because numerous reports show that crocodiles are a major threat to humans (Das & Jana, 2017;Fukuda et al., 2014;García-Grajales & Buenrostro-Silva, 2019;Wallace et al., 2012). They would have been well represented if our literature survey had included nonscientific reports (e.g., many cases have been published in local newspapers) and had focused on predation of humans by large predators. ...
Abundant empirical and theoretical studies indicate that predation is a key driver of primate evolution. The Snake Detection Theory (SDT) posits that snakes have been the main predators of primates since the late Cretaceous and that they influenced the diversification and evolution of primates. Laboratory research focusing on the innate ability of primates to detect snakes amid complex visual stimuli has provided strong support for key tenets of the SDT. While this theory has greatly contributed to our knowledge of primate evolution, supporting experimental studies may have overly focused on snakes and disregarded other important predators. This potential sampling bias weakens the conclusion that primates respond with a specific (high) intensity to snakes compared to other predators. We reviewed the literature about primate-predator interactions under natural and experimental conditions. We listed the primate and predator species involved in natural versus experimental studies. Predation events on primates recorded in the field mainly involved other primates, then raptors and carnivorans. SDT-related experimental studies heavily focused on snakes as predator stimuli and did not include raptors. Other experimental studies largely used snakes and primates and to a lesser extent carnivorans. Apes were the most often tested primates in experimental studies, whereas other primate taxa were neglected. Moreover, predators used as stimuli in experimental studies were inaccurately identified, notably snakes. Altogether, our results show that SDT-related studies neglected most of the major natural predators of primates. SDT studies also focused on a handful of primate species, whereas the theory relies on comparisons among taxa. Finally, poor taxonomic information on snakes used as stimuli blurs the interpretation of their relationship with primates. We suggest that future studies test the SDT by presenting a wide range of predators to different primate species to improve our understanding of the complexity of predator–prey interactions.
... Consequently, research that aims to contribute to coexistence should understand the factors that influence tolerance and acceptance of wildlife at particular sites and in particular situations [19]. In general, people harbor negative attitudes and are more intolerant or nonaccepting where wildlife species (1) instill fear [20,21], (2) threaten human lives [22,23], and (3) depredate crops or livestock to the extent that livelihoods are adversely affected [24][25][26][27][28]. Where intolerance or nonacceptance exists, governments, private individuals, community groups, and others often negatively respond to wildlife using legal or illegal lethal and non-lethal methods [29,30]. ...
... In Africa, research on human-wildlife conflict and coexistence has largely focused on conspicuous taxa, notably large carnivores [16,22,26,36], elephants [37][38][39][40], primates [25,27,[41][42][43], and problematic species (usually one or more of the above taxa) within a particular site (e.g., national park or game reserve) [44,45]. Like the African elephant (Loxodonta africana), the river, or common, hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius) is a large mega-herbivore that can cause widespread farm damage [46][47][48]. ...
In a world increasingly affected by human presence and activities, achieving human–wildlife coexistence has become the goal of many wildlife conservation programs. Coexistence requires an understanding of factors that contribute to human tolerance and acceptance of problematic wildlife. In four communities in Nigeria, we used structured and semi-structured interviews to explore local people’s acceptance of the river hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius) at a large reservoir with high human impact and where other conspicuous, damage-causing species are absent. We collected data two years apart to evaluate whether acceptance changed over time. Acceptance was low among respondents (21%). Logistic-regression results showed that attitudes, beliefs related to benefits and risks, behaviors toward hippos, study period, and income source significantly influenced acceptance of hippos. Results from Woolf tests showed that hippo-caused human fatalities most notably modified the observed decline in acceptance between study years. The potential significant impact of rare, yet severe events (in this case, human fatalities) on acceptance of wildlife and thus human–wildlife coexistence was supported in this study, one of few focused on hippo-human relations. For conservation and development interventions to be effective at this site, they should, at a minimum, improve human safety around hippos, emphasize current and potential benefits of hippos, create avenues for off-farm income, and reduce crop losses owing to hippos.
