Conflict between wild carnivores and livestock raisers in Central Chile
Loading...
Date
2009
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Conflict between people and wild carnivores is one of the most urgent issues worldwide. This conflict impacts on humans (with economic losses), as well as wildlife (carnivore persecution and hunting) and ecosystems (carnivores are necessary to maintain functional equilibriums). In Chile, this conflict is evidenced in the high number of complaints received by the Chilean Agriculture and Livestock Service (SAG), mainly of attacks by puma (Puma concolor) and Foxes (Lycalopex griseus and L. culpaeus). Our study consisted in an assessment of this conflict in six rural places in the Mediterranean ecosystem of central Chile (29º50’S - 34º15’S). We applied questionnaires (N=60) in order to evaluate the conflict perception by farmers. We also studied the diet of the carnivore assemblage, using taxonomic keys to identify undigested remains in 102 scats collected opportunistically in the same localities. We inquired about livestock type, management practices and predation history. Mean livestock herd size was 84 individuals per household, including goats, sheep, cattle and horses, either adult or young. Management and husbandry practices were scarce, with almost no sanitary or reproductive care and herds were free ranging in hills and Andean valleys most of the year. Every surveyed household declared livestock losses to predation, mainly by Puma (28,1%), Foxes (27,4%), Feral dogs (17,1%), Andean condor (16,4%) and other species (11%) and 97,4% of respondents declared that carnivores affected them. Diet analyses of dogs (N=7) presented the highest livestock consumption (40%), followed by Foxes (N=27; 13,04%), Puma (N=27; 9,68%) and small Wild Cats (N=41; 6,9%). All of the species studied showed a high consumption of European hare (Lepus capensis). Nevertheless, Puma (80,85%) showed the greatest consumption of this exotic species, followed by Foxes (36,96%), small Wild cats (41,38%) and Dogs (30%). We conclude that indeed there’s a strong conflict between wild carnivores and farmers, but low livestock presence in diet and other expected mortality causes lead us to speculate that its real magnitude might be overestimated. Further studies with bigger sample sizes, more refined methodology and in situ verification are needed to get a more accurate measurement of both perceived and real conflict. This study, though limited, still provides a usefull initial approach to the issue.
Description
Keywords
Human wildlife conflicts, Human dimensions of wildlife