Analyzing local people’s opinions on incidences, magnitude and mitigation measures of human-elephant interactions adjacent to the Serengeti National Park

We analysed local people’s opinions to understand their knowledge on the magnitude, incidence, adverse impacts and techniques for minimizing the adverse impacts of human-interactions in the Bunda district. The survey involved 130 local people from 12 villages for survey and interviews. The survey used a purposive sampling technique to locate local people with relevant knowledge on human-elephant interactions occurrences. Researchers are grateful to incorporate local people's opinions into this study because their consolidated knowledge and skills, have for centuries, contributed to undisputed scientific knowledge in environmental conservation. In this study, researchers have learnt that crop damage was the main adverse impacts of human-elephant interactions while house damage was the least recorded incident. Despite crop damage being the most common impact of human-elephant interactions but hidden impacts are the largest adverse impacts. The majority of locals use traditional techniques to prevent and control problem elephants. However, the habituation of elephants to the techniques hinders their effectiveness. A minority of villagers use wounding traps, report to conservation agencies to reduce the damage from elephants. Local people claimed that elephants are docile as it was possible to approach them as close as 50 meters without any harm. Despite their docility, locals also claim that stopping elephants from crop damage may result into human deaths. Villagers acknowledge sighting more than 11 elephants every day in the farming areas. The study recommends the adoption and application of spatial and simulation technologies to identify where, why, how negative impacts of human-elephant interactions. This will suggest the appropriate size of landscape interface of human-elephant interactions in the district

Integration of agent-based and GIS-based modelling for geosimulation of human-elephant Interactions in the Bunda district, Tanzania

Human-elephant interactions (HEI) are one type of the human-wildlife interactions that cause several adverse impacts to communities near African wildlife reserves. However, HEI is considered to be the most disastrous because of hostility of elephants and sheer size. The adverse impacts of human-elephant interactions include human and elephant deaths and injuries, crop damage and hidden impacts. Crop damage is the most common HEI reported adverse impact. Existing spatial and socio-economic studies provide a clear insight into HEI occurrences but lack precise measurements for each factor to either minimise or eradicate HEI occurrences. The model was developed to recommend the best HEI scenario(s) for either reduction or eradication of HEI occurrences in the Bunda District. A field survey was conducted to collect local opinions on HEI. A total of 130 questionnaires were distributed and collected from 12 villages in the district. Closeness of the villages to protected areas was the main criterion used to select the study area villages. The results from the questionnaires and secondary data were used to develop rule sets for development, calibration and, validation of an agent-based model of HEI for the Bunda District, Tanzania. Spatial data on the location of hidden impacts and elephant crop damage were collected from 12 villages. Due to the complexity of hidden impacts and elephant crop damage, agricultural officers, wildlife officers, medical experts, and community development officers were consulted for clarification and consultation. The spatial data were used for kernel density estimation and hotspot analysis. Additionally, the spatial analysis was conducted to understand the relationship between HEI occurrences and environmental features. The spatial analysis showed the presence of more HEI incidents near the Grumeti Game Reserve than the Serengeti National Park. In addition, many incidents of HEI occurred within 2000 meters from rivers and protected areas. The results from a spatial analysis were used for model development, calibration and, verification and validation of the model. The model simulated, tested and evaluated 18 modelling scenarios. Model results from each scenario were analysed for comparative performance, where minimal recorded incidents of crop damage, human deaths, elephant deaths, and hidden impacts were the primary focus. In that case, the selection of the best performing scenario based on the magnitude of the reduction of adverse impact(s). The AGHEI recommends the best scenario that minimised human access to the river, conservation corridors as well as the reduction in elephant population size. However, for each selection of the best scenario(s), there were costs that a model user must incur, as there was no cost -ree scenario. Reduction of any of the adverse impacts may run counter to fiscal, conservation, land and socio-economic policies. Therefore, the model user may select the best scenario within the constraints of these policies. AGHEI allows conservationists to design, test and prescribe tested actions that can reduce HEI occurrences. This approach is possible in all countries with active elephant ranges worldwide, once modified. This AGHEI is specifically applicable to Bunda District, as it replicates the environment and behaviours of agents specific to Bunda. It serves a specific purpose and not a general-purpose tool. However, implementation of AGHEI to other areas is possible but it requires changes in the densities of elephants and humans in the models, as well as their attributes and the environmental characteristics of new areas. In addition, there must be changes in interaction rules to reflect the HEI dynamics of the areas of interest-specific to local populations. The thesis recommends further studies to investigate the distribution of HEI incidents in villages near Grumeti Game Reserve and Serengeti National Park, to evaluate, environmental legal and socio-economic implications for implementation of AGHEI modelling scenarios

International and domestic tourist hunting: A critical review on environmental and socio-economic implications in Sub-Saharan Africa

Tourist hunting is a regular consumptive wildlife utilization occurring within and outside core protected areas for trophies and leisure attainments. It is one of the most renowned tourism undertakings which involve the killing of animals for recreational purposes. In essence, hunters acquire trophies for different purposes including production of decorations and traditional medicines. Currently, there is a hot debate on whether to continues or cease tourist hunting as animal activists, some conservation stakeholders believe that hunting is cruel to animals and threat to ecosystems. In this paper, the author reviewed and analyzed various documented evidences which opponents and proponents of the debate published to conclude whether the consequences of trophy hunting are real or overstated. Better understanding of those consequences becomes necessary as it helps stakeholders understand whether tourist hunting is fair or unfair. Tourist hunting may cause constructive and destructive consequences on environment and socio-economic livelihoods which however depend on type of hunted species, age, sex of hunted animal, season of hunting and hunting methods. It may cause species extinction, disrupts the population structure of hunted species, emissions of greenhouse gases, production of recyclable and unrecyclable wastes, change of animal behaviors and overhunting. In short, the overhunting of wildlife resources due to trophy hunting might be less or equal to the wildlife overharvesting caused by poaching, wildlife trafficking and capturing of wildlife to supplement zoological gardens. According to studies, tourist hunting seems to have less destructions than other forms of tourist activities and wildlife utilizations as many conservation agencies have well described policies and laws to regulate tourist hunting operations. Debaters confuse between tourist hunting and poaching. Tourist hunting is the legal killing of animal to obtain certain part of an animal by following specified hunting regulations while poaching is the capturing or killing and animal for either a part of the entire animal with or without the valid hunting license. A hunter with a valid trophy hunting license violating any of hunting regulations including with prohibited hunting gears, or hunting off season, or hunting more animals than specified in the license, or animal of different sex or age, such a tourist hunter turns into a poacher

International and domestic tourist hunting: A critical review on environmental and socio-economic implications in Sub-Saharan Africa

Tourist hunting is a regular consumptive wildlife utilization occurring within and outside core protected areas for trophies and leisure attainments. It is one of the most renowned tourism undertakings which involve the killing of animals for recreational purposes. In essence, hunters acquire trophies for different purposes including production of decorations and traditional medicines. Currently, there is a hot debate on whether to continues or cease tourist hunting as animal activists, some conservation stakeholders believe that hunting is cruel to animals and threat to ecosystems. In this paper, the author reviewed and analyzed various documented evidences which opponents and proponents of the debate published to conclude whether the consequences of trophy hunting are real or overstated. Better understanding of those consequences becomes necessary as it helps stakeholders understand whether tourist hunting is fair or unfair. Tourist hunting may cause constructive and destructive consequences on environment and socio-economic livelihoods which however depend on type of hunted species, age, sex of hunted animal, season of hunting and hunting methods. It may cause species extinction, disrupts the population structure of hunted species, emissions of greenhouse gases, production of recyclable and unrecyclable wastes, change of animal behaviors and overhunting. In short, the overhunting of wildlife resources due to trophy hunting might be less or equal to the wildlife overharvesting caused by poaching, wildlife trafficking and capturing of wildlife to supplement zoological gardens. According to studies, tourist hunting seems to have less destructions than other forms of tourist activities and wildlife utilizations as many conservation agencies have well described policies and laws to regulate tourist hunting operations. Debaters confuse between tourist hunting and poaching. Tourist hunting is the legal killing of animal to obtain certain part of an animal by following specified hunting regulations while poaching is the capturing or killing and animal for either a part of the entire animal with or without the valid hunting license. A hunter with a valid trophy hunting license violating any of hunting regulations including with prohibited hunting gears, or hunting off season, or hunting more animals than specified in the license, or animal of different sex or age, such a tourist hunter turns into a poacher