A tale of three villages: choosing an effective method for assessing poaching levels in western Serengeti, Tanzania

Abstract

Poaching for bushmeat is a major problem for conservation of wildlife populations in many parts of Africa, including the Serengeti ecosystem in Tanzania. However, the severity of the poaching problem is often unclear because of a lack of accurate data. Directly asking people to self-report illegal activity faces the obvious problem of under-reporting. Use of arrest records from anti-poaching patrols may reflect levels of poaching activity but could also be driven by funding and quality of anti-poaching efforts. A third method, assessing poaching by asking about bushmeat consumption, is indirect, possibly subject to under-reporting, and also subject to limits on the accuracy of memory of respondents. We compare rates of poaching derived by self-assessment of poaching activities (based on household interviews), dietary recall of bushmeat consumption over a variety of time frames, and arrest records from anti-poaching units. We apply these three methods to assess poaching activities in three villages bordering protected areas on the western boundary of Serengeti National Park. Our results showed that dietary recall of bushmeat consumption and arrest records indicated similar patterns of poaching across the three villages but self-reporting differed significantly. There appear to be significant advantages to coupling results from dietary recall of bushmeat consumption and arrest records to estimate the level of poaching activity. In situations where reliable data from anti-poaching units are unavailable, cost-effective data collection of bushmeat consumption will provide a viable alternative to assess levels of poaching involvement of villages that border protected areas.

Why Poaching Pays: A Summary of Risks and Benefits Illegal Hunters Face in Western Serengeti, Tanzania

“…While a variety of methods have been utilized in collecting sensitive data [26], self-reporting based on trust-developed relationships remains the only way to collect longitudinal career-to-date data of poachers and the households they represent. This technique complements random samples like the randomized response technique because it more effectively dispels fear in the respondent, ensuring greater validity in responses.…”

The effect of bushmeat consumption on migratory wildlife in the Serengeti ecosystem, Tanzania

“…1). Wildlife is not confined to the protected areas and animals face a greater risk of being hunted when they travel beyond protected area boundaries (Campbell & Borner, 1995;Campbell & Hofer, 1995;Knapp et al, 2010). This study was conducted in communities adjacent to the western boundary of the Ikorongo and Grumeti Game Reserves, the Ikona Wildlife Management Area, and Serengeti National Park (Fig.…”

“…Weekly dietary recall questionnaires provide a broad time horizon for assessing varied diets (Gersovitz et al, 1978;Day et al, 2001) and have greater reliability when estimating village-level involvement in bushmeat consumption compared to other self-response survey techniques (Knapp et al, 2010). Our questionnaire consisted of a dietary recall survey of the meat-based protein sources cooked and consumed in the household each day over the previous week, including beef, goat, sheep, chicken, pork, fish, dagaa (small fish), bushmeat and eggs.…”

Bushmeat Consumption in Western Tanzania: A Comparative Analysis from the Same Ecosystem

“…Arrest records, self-reporting about illegal activities, and asking about bushmeat consumption can lead to different conclusions, although the first and last methods are sometimes congruent [41]. Despite differences in methodologies, however, current information shows that Tanzanians illegally hunt a large variety of mammalian species, ranging in size from elephants Loxodonta africana to elephant shrews; that they use snares, traps and guns to catch wild animals; and that they hunt for both direct consumption and for selling meat.…”