Poaching Risks in Community-Based Natural Resource Management
Poaching Risks in Community-Based Natural Resource Management
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01960.x
复制
发表时间：
2013-02-01
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Gore, Meredith L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kahler, Jessica S.;Roloff, Gary J.;Gore, Meredith L.
偷猎会扰乱以社区为基础的自然资源管理系统中的野生动物管理工作。监测、评估和获取偷猎数据是困难的。我们利用当地利益相关者的知识和偷猎记录，对纳米比亚卡普里维两个由社区成员管理自然资源的地区的偷猎事件风险进行了排名和绘制地图。我们绘制了当地利益相关者对偷猎风险、野生动物破坏生计的风险以及野生动物分布的看法，并将这些地图与空间上明确的偷猎事件记录进行了比较。记录的偷猎事件和利益相关者对偷猎发生地点的看法在空间上没有相关性。然而，记录在案的偷猎事件的地点与利益相关者认为野生动物威胁其生计的区域在空间上相关。这一结果表明偷猎是对野生动物破坏的反应。当地利益相关者认为野生动物种群被偷猎的风险很高，偷猎发生在野生动物丰富的地方。这些发现表明，利益攸关方关注其社区的野生动物资源，并表明需要对偷猎活动进行综合和持续的监测，并在野生动物与农业的交界处进行进一步的干预。让利益攸关方参与偷猎风险的评估可以促进他们参与当地的保护工作，这是以社区为基础的管理的核心原则。我们认为利益相关者挖走的是告密者，而不是嫌疑人，我们的技术在空间上是明确的。在不同的地区可能需要不同的战略来减少偷猎。例如，在居民区可能需要减少人与野生动物冲突的干预措施，在更偏远的地区可能需要增加有针对性的巡逻。利益相关者生成的人与野生动物互动地图可能是一种有价值的执法和干预支持工具。
Poaching can disrupt wildlife-management efforts in community-based natural resource management systems. Monitoring, estimating, and acquiring data on poaching is difficult. We used local-stakeholder knowledge and poaching records to rank and map the risk of poaching incidents in 2 areas where natural resources are managed by community members in Caprivi, Namibia. We mapped local stakeholder perceptions of the risk of poaching, risk of wildlife damage to livelihoods, and wildlife distribution and compared these maps with spatially explicit records of poaching events. Recorded poaching events and stakeholder perceptions of where poaching occurred were not spatially correlated. However, the locations of documented poaching events were spatially correlated with areas that stakeholders perceived wildlife as a threat to their livelihoods. This result suggests poaching occurred in response to wildlife damage occurred. Local stakeholders thought that wildlife populations were at high risk of being poached and that poaching occurred where there was abundant wildlife. These findings suggest stakeholders were concerned about wildlife resources in their community and indicate a need for integrated and continued monitoring of poaching activities and further interventions at the wildlife-agricultural interface. Involving stakeholders in the assessment of poaching risks promotes their participation in local conservation efforts, a central tenet of community-based management. We considered stakeholders poaching informants, rather than suspects, and our technique was spatially explicit. Different strategies to reduce poaching are likely needed in different areas. For example, interventions that reduce human-wildlife conflict may be required in residential areas, and increased and targeted patrolling may be required in more remote areas. Stakeholder-generated maps of human-wildlife interactions may be a valuable enforcement and intervention support tool.