Human-predator conflict in Namibia: an agricultural perspective

Although many methods has been suggested to mitigate human-predator conflict, it is still a worldwide and increasingly important problem, both for predator conservation and for livestock farming. In the past most solutions to... [ view full abstract ]

Although many methods has been suggested to mitigate human-predator conflict, it is still a worldwide and increasingly important problem, both for predator conservation and for livestock farming. In the past most solutions to this conflict has been either from an agricultural perspective or from a conservation perspective. However, because the goals of these two perspectives are seldom the same, there has been frustratingly little progress in preventing human-wildlife conflict. Here we review different published methods used worldwide to alleviate human-wildlife conflict, specifically conflict between livestock farmers and predators, the pros and cons of each method and the probable usefulness of the different methods to livestock farmers in Namibia. We propose a more useful classification of methods than the usual lethal non-lethal dichotomy, and compare the various methods in terms of their success and cost-effectiveness. We also investigate the possible reasons for both failures and successes of the different methods and propose that a new approach is needed if we want practical and sustainable solutions to our current human-wildlife conflicts. Namibian farmers were surveyed to estimate farmer-predator conflict. Since most cheetahs and leopards occur outside protected areas, continued human-wildlife conflict poses a risk to their long-term survival. Livestock depredation was reportedly the major cause of livestock loss on commercial Namibian farms. Leopards, cheetahs, caracals and jackals were the primary predators of livestock, leopards being the primary predator on cattle and jackals on small livestock. On average 9.2 Livestock Units per farm per year were killed by predators, with a few farms losing more than double this average. About 70% of farmers killed predators as part of their management, but the results suggests that this approach is ineffective. A small significant decrease in predation losses was associated with higher prey diversity. With farmers having little idea about the costs of anti-predation methods, there is a need to identify cost-effective, ecologically sustainable methods, resulting in lower livestock losses and sustainable ecosystems.