Human-wildlife conflict around Midre-Kebid Abo Monastry, Gurage Zone, Southwest Ethiopia

Abstract

This human-wildlife conflict study was carried out around Midre-Kebid Abo Monastry. A descriptive survey design method was used and both qualitative and quantitative data were collected using questionnaires. Field experiment was carried out on two selected crops-maize and enset, to estimate crop damage by wild animals. Resource competition (46%), increased wildlife population (42.5%) and livestock populations (11.5%) were the major causes of conflict identified in the area. Wheat and maize were the most affected crops in the area with an estimate loss of 155.29 ± 12/kg/year and 106.15±12.3/kg/year, respectively. The average loss of enset obtained from estimation of 0.36 ha in four counts was 36 kg. On the other hand, the average loss of maize from estimation of 0.12 ha in four counts was 48 cobs (9.6 kg). Therefore, estimated damage based on the total coverage of enset (32 ha) and maize (42 ha) has become 3200 and 3360 kg, respectively. The most known problematic wild animals in the study area were apes (86.2%) followed by monkey (71.3%) and hyena (56.3%). Albeit there is an intense human-wildlife conflict in the study area, majority of the respondents (64.5%) have positive perception towards wildlife conservation. Different crop/livestock protection mechanisms, including guarding, chasing, hunting, fencing, cooperative guarding, guarding using dogs, trapping and scarecrow are used by the local community. The use unpalatable crops as buffer crops enforce environment and forest related laws and local government engagement in creating awareness about wildlife conservation and compensatory schemes are important to lessen the problem.

Knowledge, attitude and practice of the local people towards human–carnivore coexistence in Faragosa–Fura Landscape, Gamo Zone, southern Ethiopia

“…This is in line with studies conducted in different countries worldwide (Lozano et al 2019). Studies in Ethiopia reported that guarding with dogs is a major predation control method used by local people (Amare andSerekebirhan 2019, Mekonen 2020). Keeping chickens indoors at night was implemented by most local people to minimize chicken predation by carnivores in Ethiopia (Tamrat et al 2020) and in northern Kenya (Woodroffe et al 2007), in line with the present study.…”

Perception and attitude of the local people toward carnivore population and conservation in the Faragosa‐Fura landscape of the Southern Rift Valley, Ethiopia

“…The frequency of encounters with carnivores in the respondent's area was very common for serval, common genet, spotted hyena, and black‐backed jackal, and rare for lion and caracal. The reason for the commonness and rarity of carnivores is possibly due to their differences in nutritional behavior and tolerance to anthropogenic disturbance (Amare & Serekebirhan, 2019; Bauer et al, 2021; Gebresenbet, Bauer, et al, 2018; Merkebu & Yazezew, 2021). The perceived rarity of species that are of conservation concern, such as lions and leopards, and the abundance of smaller‐sized species have implications for developing conservation priorities in the area.…”

Effects of land-use and landscape drivers in the species richness and distribution of carnivores in Faragosa-Fura Landscape of Southern Rift Valley, Ethiopia

“…Possibly they might have been 396 attracted to grassland due to promote ease of movement, access to termites and insects, anti-397 predator scanning, and prey availability [4,18]. Therefore, the land-use types should be given [15,17,45]. These patterns are shared across East Africa and worldwide, where carnivore avoids human disturbance except a few members (e.g., hyena) that are known to attack livestock inside human settlements at night and attracted by anthropogenic food sources (e.g., mongooses) [20,39].…”

“…The influential factors are land-use types such as forest, grassland, wetland, agricultural land, and human settlement [11] because of differences in resources. While agriculture is the backbone of socio-economic development in developing countries like Ethiopia, it often comes at the expense of biodiversity and ecosystem services [17,18]. Further, altitude and distance from the road [15,19] are landscape factors affecting carnivore species richness and distribution.…”