Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) running the gauntlet: an evaluation of translocations into free-range environments in Namibia

Abstract

Following dramatic range and population declines, the cheetah is Africa’s most endangered large felid. In Namibia, private land managers still trap cheetahs but increasingly consider moving animals instead of killing them. Across Africa, managers have translocated perceived conflict carnivores for decades, but rarely evaluated their actions. We analyse the outcomes of 15 cheetah translocations (for 23 adults and 10 dependent offspring) into free-range environments in Namibia. We released cheetahs at an average distance of 419.6 km ± 216.1 km SD (range: 71–816 km) after captive periods ranging from 1–1,184 days (350.6 days ± 439.0 days SD). An individual’s ability to survive the first year predominantly determined the overall translocation success of 40%. Post-release conflict and homing had less impact on success. Cheetah survival was lowest in the first three months after release. Human persecution (50% of deaths) and spotted hyaenas (29% of deaths) had the highest effect on survival. The degree of habituation to humans acquired during captivity significantly influenced chances of survival. Cheetahs surviving the initial post-release period (∼90 days) often settled into ranges and females reproduced successfully. However, all individuals exhibited extensive movements, frequently roaming >4,000 km2 in the first six months after release (with a maximum of 19,743 km2 in 112 days), resulting in low release site fidelity. Soft release and larger recipient area size did not improve site fidelity. Based on these outcomes, we evaluated which unfenced conservation areas in Namibia could potentially receive cheetahs. We found that there are currently few public and/or private reserves large enough to contain the movement profiles we observed in this study. This suggests that most translocations will result in cheetahs re-entering farmlands where they face a high risk of persecution. In conclusion, translocations into unconfined areas can successfully conserve individual cheetahs. Due to high mortality and unpredictable outcomes, however, conservation efforts need to focus on improving tolerance of cheetahs in commercial livestock and game farming areas in order to reduce the number of indiscriminately trapped animals.

Queuing, takeovers, and becoming a fat cat: Long‐term data reveal two distinct male spatial tactics at different life‐history stages in Namibian cheetahs

“…, Weise et al. ). Some translocated males travel back to their original area where they were captured, whereas others stay in the new area (Massei et al.…”

“…, Weise et al. ). The chance of males traveling back to their capture site may well depend on whether the translocated male(s) were territory owners or floaters.…”

“…Inclusion of translocated cheetahs will overestimate HR sizes because cheetahs might travel back to their original capture site and/or display exploratory movements during an orientation phase after their release and thereby cover ranges of up to 19,743 km 2 (Weise et al. ).…”

“…Translocations were conducted because the farmers on whose farms the cheetahs were captured did not agree to have them released on their farm (Marker et al 2008). Inclusion of translocated cheetahs will overestimate HR sizes because cheetahs might travel back to their original capture site and/or display exploratory movements during an orientation phase after their release and thereby cover ranges of up to 19,743 km 2 (Weise et al 2015).…”

“…For instance, the two spatial tactics and associated life-history stages of males have to be considered when cheetahs are translocated to a new area, a common practice in Namibia to reduce the conflict between a particular farmer and a specific cheetah individual (Marker et al 2008, Weise et al 2015. Some translocated males travel back to their original area where they were captured, whereas others stay in the new area (Massei et al 2010, Weise et al 2015. The chance of males traveling back to their capture site may well depend on whether the translocated male(s) were territory owners or floaters.…”