The HABRI Foundation is calling for research proposals to investigate the health outcomes of pet ownership and/or animal-assisted activity or therapy, both for the people and the animals involved. To learn more, visit https://habri.org/grants/funding-opportunities/ close

 
You are here: Home / Journal Articles / Assessing Patterns of Human-Wildlife Conflicts and Compensation around a Central Indian Protected Area / About

Assessing Patterns of Human-Wildlife Conflicts and Compensation around a Central Indian Protected Area

By Krithi K. Karanth, Arjun M. Gopalaswamy, Ruth DeFries, Natasha Ballal

Category Journal Articles
Abstract

Mitigating crop and livestock loss to wildlife and improving compensation distribution are important for conservation efforts in landscapes where people and wildlife co-occur outside protected areas. The lack of rigorously collected spatial data poses a challenge to management efforts to minimize loss and mitigate conflicts. We surveyed 735 households from 347 villages in a 5154 km2 area surrounding Kanha Tiger Reserve in India. We modeled self-reported household crop and livestock loss as a function of agricultural, demographic and environmental factors, and mitigation measures. We also modeled self-reported compensation received by households as a function of demographic factors, conflict type, reporting to authorities, and wildlife species involved. Seventy-three percent of households reported crop loss and 33% livestock loss in the previous year, but less than 8% reported human injury or death. Crop loss was associated with greater number of cropping months per year and proximity to the park. Livestock loss was associated with grazing animals inside the park and proximity to the park. Among mitigation measures only use of protective physical structures were associated with reduced livestock loss. Compensation distribution was more likely for tiger related incidents, and households reporting loss and located in the buffer. Average estimated probability of crop loss was 0.93 and livestock loss was 0.60 for surveyed households. Estimated crop and livestock loss and compensation distribution were higher for households located inside the buffer. Our approach modeled conflict data to aid managers in identifying potential conflict hotspots, influential factors, and spatially maps risk probability of crop and livestock loss. This approach could help focus allocation of conservation efforts and funds directed at conflict prevention and mitigation where high densities of people and wildlife co-occur.

Submitter

Marcy Wilhelm-South

Purdue University

Date 2012
Publication Title PLoS ONE
Volume 7
Issue 12
Pages 13
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0050433
URL https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0050433
Language English
Additional Language English
Cite this work

Researchers should cite this work as follows:

Tags
  1. Animal roles
  2. human-wildlife interactions
  3. India
  4. Leopards
  5. Livestock
  6. open access
  7. peer-reviewed
  8. predation
  9. Wild animals
  10. Wolves
Badges
  1. open access
  2. peer-reviewed