Loading...
6 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
- Factors influencing the success of capturing European brown bears with foot snaresPublication . Pereira, Joana; Rosalino, L. M.; Reljić, Slaven; Babic, Natarsha; Huber, DjuroManagement of free-ranging wildlife may include the capture of animals, with the implication that the capture process is optimized, both logistically and economically and in a way that avoids animal suffering, injury or accidental mortality. Studies targeting the optimization of trapping techniques are scarce, especially when focusing on large European mammals. Therefore, to fill this knowledge gap, we aimed to evaluate key factors that help determine brown bear capture success. This was done by analysing a complete data set from 23 years of capturing free-living Eurasian brown bears in Croatia by using Aldrich-type foot snares. Results showed significantly higher capture efficiency when traps were located at permanent feeding sites when compared to temporary feeding sites. Also, the use of a trail trap design was significantly more efficient in capturing bears than using a cubby set. Finally, results showed that trapping was more efficient when we bait the traps more frequently and when we implemented longer trap-sessions, with at least 14 days.
- Livelihood vulnerability increases human–wildlife interactionsPublication . Pereira, Joana; Rosalino, L. M.; Mucova, Serafino; Massangue, Yasalde; Abdulrazak, Murchide; Vahossa, Somar; Selemane, Mouzinho; Fonseca, Carlos; Santos, Maria JoãoHuman–wildlife interactions (HWIs) occur in many rural African communities, with potential impacts on livelihood vulnerability. High livelihood vulnerability may force communities to employ strategies that increase the risk of negative HWIs, yet the extent to which HWIs drive or are driven by vulnerability is unclear. We hypothesized that more vulnerable households are more likely to be exposed to wildlife and experience negative interactions. To test this hypothesis, we calculated the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) of rural households in and around Quirimbas National Park (north-eastern Mozambique) and assessed whether there is a link between livelihood vulnerability and HWIs. We found a two-way association between LVI and HWIs, with more vulnerable households indeed taking greater risks and encountering wildlife when fetching water from rivers, whereas less vulnerable households tended not to employ strategies likely to increase wildlife encounters. We also observed that HWIs exert a strong effect on livelihood vulnerability, suggesting that HWIs should be included as an exposure factor in vulnerability assessments for rural households. We recommend that livelihood strategies and community vulnerability should be considered when designing HWI mitigation schemes and implementing conservation measures.
- Human-wildlife interactions and livelihood vulnerability in the context of conservation in MozambiquePublication . Pereira, Joana; Rosalino, Luís Miguel do Carmo; Santos, Maria João; Fonseca, CarlosConservation focus has changed during the last decades, with the uprising of its human dimension, and finding tools to sustainably reconcile conservation and social goals has become a priority. Protected Areas (PAs) are the most common strategy worldwide for safeguarding biodiversity and maintaining ecosystem services, but with people as part of the system, PAs may impact human livelihoods, particularly engendering a high risk of negative Human-Wildlife Interactions (HWI). HWI are not only a threat to livelihoods but also may risk failure of conservation efforts. Therefore, understanding what drives human vulnerability within PAs, and how PAs may serve as a tool to meet conservation and livelihood goals is an utmost necessity. In this thesis, I explore the interactions between rural livelihoods, protected areas, and HWI in Mozambique. By applying the concept of livelihood vulnerability in the context of PAs, I provide empirical support that: i) household vulnerability increases the exposure to HWI, and HWI drives vulnerability of households in PAs; ii) other dimensions of vulnerability, such as climate variability, lack of livelihood strategies and weak social networks among households, are contributing to the overall household vulnerability across PAs, although some PA’s context-specific drivers are still influential; and iii) PAs managers need to improve bidirectional communication with communities to assure better inclusivity of communities in PAs management, which might improve its efficacy in preserving biodiversity; and iv) at the national scale, vulnerability determinants, as river density, modulate the effects of the most important drivers of HWI – forests cover and human density. Overall, my research builds on a holistic view of livelihoods and their drivers, and their integration into protected areas management towards a more socially inclusive model of conservation. My results add to a growing body of evidence that social and conservation problems cannot be addressed separately, being often interdependent. First, by highlighting the value of considering HWI as a significant factor of exposure in vulnerability assessments and the integration of livelihood vulnerability in negative HWI mitigation strategies. Second, by evidencing that livelihood vulnerability and negative HWI are affected by social-ecological factors acting at different scales, highlighting that the relationship HWI-vulnerability acts beyond PAs, and cross-scale interventions and coordination might be needed. Lastly, the social networks of co-management processes and community-based strategies in Mozambique might benefit from fostering bidirectional communication between communities and PAs managers, to promote the active involvement of communities in conservation, with the expectation that with such bidirectional communications PAs can achieve more holistically the conservation goals they aim at.
- Livelihood vulnerability increases human–wildlife interactionsPublication . Pereira, Joana; Rosalino, L. M.; Mucova, Serafino; Massangue, Yasalde; Abdulrazak, Murchide; Vahossa, Somar; Selemane, Mouzinho; Fonseca, Carlos; Santos, Maria JoãoHuman–wildlife interactions (HWIs) occur in many rural African communities, with potential impacts on livelihood vulnerability. High livelihood vulnerability may force communities to employ strategies that increase the risk of negative HWIs, yet the extent to which HWIs drive or are driven by vulnerability is unclear. We hypothesized that more vulnerable households are more likely to be exposed to wildlife and experience negative interactions. To test this hypothesis, we calculated the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) of rural households in and around Quirimbas National Park (north-eastern Mozambique) and assessed whether there is a link between livelihood vulnerability and HWIs. We found a two-way association between LVI and HWIs, with more vulnerable households indeed taking greater risks and encountering wildlife when fetching water from rivers, whereas less vulnerable households tended not to employ strategies likely to increase wildlife encounters. We also observed that HWIs exert a strong effect on livelihood vulnerability, suggesting that HWIs should be included as an exposure factor in vulnerability assessments for rural households. We recommend that livelihood strategies and community vulnerability should be considered when designing HWI mitigation schemes and implementing conservation measures.
- Brown bear feeding habits in a poor mast year where supplemental feeding occursPublication . Pereira, Joana; Viličić, Leona; Rosalino, L. M.; Reljić, Slaven; Habazin, Marina; Huber, ĐuroThe diet of free-ranging bears is an important dimension regarding their ecology, affecting their behavior, population structure, and relation with humans. In Croatia, there has been no recent study on the natural food habits of brown bears (Ursus arctos) or the influence of artificial feeding sites on their diet. During 2017, we collected 53 brown bear stomachs from bears in 2 regions of Croatia— Gorski Kotar and Lika—to assess their diet. Plants—Allium ursinum, the Poaceae family, Cornus mas, berries (i.e., Prunus avium, Rubus plicatus), beechnuts (Fagus spp.)—and various plant parts (i.e., dry leaves, buds, conifer needles, and twigs), as well as mushrooms, made up 80% of the percentage of the volume (%V) of all consumed items. Corn (Zea mays) from the feeding sites made up 37% of the bears’ diet (%V), whereas 20% (%V) was meat and 14% (%V) was pome fruits. Scavenged or preyed animal species, such as wild boar (Sus scrofa), horse (Equus caballus), domestic pig (S. scrofa domesticus), cattle (Bos taurus), roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), and small mammals comprised >66% of %FO (frequency of occurrence), but only 20% of %V. Our results showed that food resources (i.e., livestock such as horses, cattle, and pigs, and corn) found at supplemental feeding sites were more frequently chosen by bears than natural food in 2017, a year characterized by almost no beechnut crop. The results showed that subadult bears obtained most food from feeding sites. These 2 patterns suggested that bears may focus on artificial feeding sites to find food in years when natural food sources are depleted, although this should be tested using diet and food availability data collected from several years.
- Livelihood vulnerability and human-wildlife interactions across protected areasPublication . Pereira, Joana; Rosalino, L. M.; Ekblom, Anneli; Santos, MariaProtected Areas (PAs) are important wildlife refuges and act as climate change buffers, but they may impact human livelihoods, particularly engendering a high risk of negative human-wildlife interactions (HWI). Understanding synergies and trade-offs among the drivers of overall human vulnerability within PAs is needed to ensure good outcomes for conservation and human well-being. We examined how climate variability, HWI, and socio-demographics affect livelihood vulnerability across three PAs in Mozambique, Southeast Africa. We used structured questionnaires to obtain information on livelihood vulnerability and social-ecological context-specific variables. We applied principal component analysis to understand synergies and trade-offs between the dimensions of vulnerability and linear models to test the effect of social-ecological drivers on vulnerability. We show that households are mostly vulnerable within PAs due to exposure to climate variability and to HWI, and their low capacity to employ livelihood strategies or to have a strong social network. Furthermore, we show that vulnerability to HWI and climate variability increases with distance to strict protection areas within the PAs and distance to rivers, which implies that proximity to strict protection areas and rivers within PAs still promotes better livelihood conditions than elsewhere. On the other hand, we also found that lower access to infrastructure and other livelihood assets enhances vulnerability, which reflects a trade-off within PAs that potentially limits the benefits of socially inclusive conservation. Our results show that the impacts of PAs, HWI, and climate on community vulnerability should not be viewed in isolation, but instead, conservation and livelihood improvement strategies should reflect their interconnectedness. Although livelihood vulnerability appears to be shaped by these general effects of PAs, it is important also to consider the local PA context when addressing or mitigating livelihood vulnerability in and around them.