Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 2000. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on July 4, 2005). Includes bibliographical references (p. 215-227).

In both Kenya and Botswana, wildlife is a valuable natural resource in terms of its economic value, nutritional value, ecological value, medicinal value, educational and scientific value, as well as recreational and socio-cultural value. Despite this beneficial value, however, wild animals in both countries also cause damage and impose heavy losses on society. They also disrupt peaceful existence in local communities living in close proximity to wildlife areas. The damage they cause includes attacks on people and livestock, destruction of crops and other property as well as infrastructure. This has resulted in a human-wildlife conflict, with people having negative attitudes towards wildlife. Initially people seem to be the victims when wild animals attack them or destroy their property. Later, the animals are the real victims when people in retaliation start attacking, ensnaring or poisoning them. Contrary to the belief that it contributes to poverty alleviation, many people in the local communities in wildlife areas strongly believe wildlife has contributed to their poverty. Unless the governments of both Kenya and Botswana maintain efficient legal and institutional arrangements for wildlife damage, the future of wildlife conservation in both countries is bleak. These arrangements, if effectively enforced, have the potential to: reduce retaliatory killing of wildlife; ensure incidents of wildlife damage are reported; alleviate the losses and suffering associated with wildlife damage; and bolster public support for conservation programmes. It is encouraging that both countries recognize wildlife damage as a major problem and have put in place legal and institutional arrangements to address this problem. This study evaluated the legal and institutional arrangements in Kenya and Botswana on wildlife damage, assessing their suitability, adequacy as well as their effectiveness. While several studies have been conducted on wildlife damage, most of them mainly focus on institutional arrangements and the actual abatement measures adopted, few of them approach the subject from a legal standpoint, in the way this study does. Those studies do not, for instance, discuss the legal basis of the need for legal arrangements for wildlife damage alleviation and the various approaches and actual forms of legal intervention. This author through the use of semi-structured interviews, self-administered questionnaires, focus group discussions, and literature survey investigated the problem of ii wildlife damage in Kenya and Botswana. A central part of this investigation was on the types of damage, the animals involved, whether and how this problem has influenced public attitudes towards wildlife conservation, and suggestions for solution. Research for this study was conducted in the Laikipia region of Kenya and the Okavango delta region of Botswana between January and December 2006. This researcher interviewed 44 respondents from each country, comprising households from the local communities within wildlife areas, senior ranking government officials, leaders of NGOs that actually work on wildlife issues, experts in natural resource management as well as eminent scholars in environmental and natural resources law and policy. Research for this study established that while the governments of both Kenya and Botswana have established certain legal and institutional frameworks on wildlife damage, there are factors that hamper their efficient operation. These factors include the relevance and suitability of the existing laws, as well as their acceptability to stakeholders; lack of appropriate policy framewoks and dispute resolution mechanisms to support the regulatory regime; institutional problems such as overlapping responsibilities, lack of adequate resources and lack of motivation among staff. These factors together with others have continued to be a major challenge to the quest for appropriate and effective legal and institutional response to the problem of wildlife damage in both countries. The study found that in both countries the law vests in the state the power to manage wildlife wherever it occurs within the national boundaries. Botswana’s community-based wildlife management model, however, offers more incentives for conservation to local communities than Kenya’s state-centered system which largely disregards the role of local communities in wildlife matters. This author has argued that local communities are critical stakeholders and the success of any conservation programmes will depend on their goodwill. Besides, while the state has a duty to protect wildlife from harm by humans, it also has a corresponding duty to protect humans and their property from damage by wild animals and to ensure that wildlife does not undermine the people’s livelihoods and development. This is, however, not usually the case as in practice the state in both countries, and especially in Kenya, iii seems to favour wild animals at the expense of the people. The study has recommended certain reforms which need to be undertaken if Kenya and Botswana have to maintain appropriate and efficient legal and institutional arrangements on wildlife damage.

Thesis (M.S.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1997. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 99-105).

Thesis (M.S.)--Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Dept., South Dakota State University, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available via the World Wide Web.

During 1993- 1994, I investigated wildlife depredation at Intermountain West fish hatcheries to quantify losses, determined the reliability of bioenergetics models and hatchery manager perceptions to predict losses, and investigated the effectiveness of simple control measures. I observed predators and surveyed managers to quantify the extent of depredation losses and to identify the species responsible. Great blue herons (Ardea herodias), black-crowned night herons (Nycticorax nycticorax), ospreys (Pandion haliaetus), and California gulls (Larus californicus) were the most significant predators of hatchery fish in the field study, and were perceived as such by hatchery managers. Losses to avian predators at two hatcheries were 7.0% and 0.6% of annual production based on my observational data, but hatchery managers believed depredation losses were 15% at each hatchery. I estimated the consumption of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) by great blue herons using bioenergetics models of existence metabolism, existence metabolism plus reproductive costs, and field metabolic rate. compared the model-based predictions to observed consumption rates of free-ranging herons foraging at a fish hatchery. The fish consumption predicted by the existence metabolism model and observed consumption were similar from October- June. During the breeding season, observed consumption was higher than consumption predicted by the existence metabolism model but lower than that expected from the energy requirements for breeding individuals. This result was expected given that only a portion of the bird population was breeding. Although consumption predicted by the field metabolic rate differed significantly from observed consumption for more months than the existence metabolism models, predicted annual consumption from field metabolic rate and observed annual consumption were not signliJcantly different (.E < 0.05). Peak observed consumption occurred during August and September and was predicted by the model. Performance of the three models may be improved with estimates of population structure and more reliable population estimates. I evaluated the effectiveness of perimeter fencing in reducing heron depredation on fish raised in concrete raceways at a trout hatchery in Midway, Utah. Fences were constructed of single-strand monofilament line placed 20 cm above raceway walls. Fences had no impact on the number of birds foraging or their fish consumption rate.

Thesis (doctoral)--Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2007. / Thesis documentation sheet inserted. Includes appendix of five papers in press and submitted manuscripts, all co-authored with others. Includes bibliographical references. Also issued electronically via World Wide Web in PDF format; online version lacks appendix.

Human wildlife conflict is a considerable conservation challenge that threatens many carnivore species worldwide and is a result of complex socio-economic and ecological processes. An understanding of the drivers of conflict is essential for any efforts to achieve coexistence. This study investigated the levels of conflict, livestock management and tolerance amongst the farming communities of the Southern and Western Kalahari in Botswana. A questionnaire survey was completed with 310 farmers throughout the region. The majority of respondents regarded coexisting with carnivores as a challenge, with losses due to depredation perceived as the greatest problem facing farmers. Conflict was widespread throughout the study area, with some spatial variations for certain species. Cattle management levels were low and while smallstock management was better, the use of improved levels of management could reduce current levels of conflict. Tolerance levels were generally low with few respondents seeing the benefits of coexistence with carnivore species. The results indicated that farm type, gender, education level, source of income, livestock numbers, location and land use all have an effect on perceived conflict and tolerance levels and strongly interact with each other. In general cattleposts were characterised by higher proportions of females, lower education levels, more benefits derived from wildlife and veld products and fewer livestock than fenced ranches. They also experienced more conflict, carried out more management and had better tolerance levels. It could be that closer connections to the land and deriving benefits from natural resources resulted in more tolerance and this is certainly worth further investigation. An improvement in the use of effective methods of livestock management, targeted environmental education programs to develop a greater awareness for the conservation value of carnivores and a diversification of livelihoods to include benefits from natural resources have the potential to reduce conflict and improve tolerance in the Kalahari region.

Human-wildlife conflict frequently involves carnivores, mainly because of their large home ranges and dietary requirements. As such, carnivores tend to be the first animals to be lost in human-dominated ecosystems. This is significant because the removal of carnivores can alter the functionality of ecosystems. However, the conservation of carnivores depends as much on the socio-political and socio-economic landscapes as it does on the ecological one. The consolidation of vast, un-fragmented conservation areas in Africa and the world is unlikely. Thus, unravelling the factors (both biological and sociological) responsible for and influencing human-predator conflict is critical for carnivore conservation. The Winterberg district in the Eastern Cape, South Africa has been a sheep (Ovis aries) farming stronghold for nearly 200 years. Consequently, conflict between farmers and predators is commonplace and depredation of livestock by caracals (Caracai caracal) remains a perennial problem. However, the extent of this human-predator conflict (including a reliable assessment of caracal density) has not been quantified. This study used camera trapping to estimate the density of caracals (a nonindividually recognisable species) in the Winterberg and a structured questionnaire to gauge the general attitudes of the farmers of the region. Caracal density was estimated to be 0.20 caracals/km². This estimate equates to a population of approximately 54 caracals across the entire district. Therefore, caracals do not appear to occur at high densities in the Winterberg. However, the survey of the residents of the Winterberg Conservancy revealed that predators were rated as the greatest problem faced by farmers in the area. Although not significant, it also showed that the size of a respondent's property and sheep mortality due to caracals had the greatest probability of affecting attitudes towards predators. The farmers lost less than 10% of their stock to caracal depredation on an annual basis. Therefore, the general perception that predators were the most important factor in stock loss in the area does not appear to be fully supported by my data. The Winterberg is a male-dominated, multigenerational society and it is likely this propagates certain perceptions towards predators which are a reflection of long-held family traditions and beliefs. Such situations can result in reactions which are disproportionate to the actual scale of the problem. However, my study was limited to a sub-set of the landowners in the Winterberg. Thus, more intensive assessments of caracal space use and community attitudes towards predators are recommended.