Assessing and evaluating human-wildlife interactions for coexistence in shared landscapes

被引:0
|
作者
Ferraz, Katia Maria Paschoaletto Micchi de Barros [1 ]
Bento, Isabella de Freitas [1 ]
Di Souza, Anna Beatriz Queiroz [1 ]
Nunes, Caio da Silveira [1 ]
Guimaraes, Maria Augusta de Mendonca [1 ]
Pereira, Monicque Silva [1 ,2 ]
da Silva, Livia Lima [1 ]
de Campos, Leticia Keiko Nunes [1 ]
Gobbi, Anita Seneme [1 ]
Alves, Jose Caio Quadrado [1 ]
Alvarez, Loisa Fabricia Prates [1 ]
Marchini, Silvio [1 ]
de Aquino, Ana Carla Medeiros Morato [1 ]
Sato, Vinicius Kenji de Moraes [1 ]
Paolino, Roberta Montanheiro [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Escola Super Agr Luis Dequeiroz, Dept Ciencias Florestais, Lab Ecol Manejo & Conservacao Fauna Silvestre, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil
[2] Secretaria Meio Ambiente Infraestrutura & Logist E, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
[3] Univ Sao Paulo, Fac Filosofia Ciencias & Letras Ribeirao Preto, Lab Ecol & Conservacao, Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil
来源
基金
巴西圣保罗研究基金会;
关键词
feeding wildlife; human-wildlife conflicts; nuisance wildlife; urban space; wildlife; HABITAT; FRAGMENTATION; FRAMEWORK; CONFLICTS; BEHAVIOR; MAMMALS; DIET;
D O I
10.3389/fcosc.2024.1456072
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Land sharing strategies for conciliating biodiversity conservation and human development usually do not consider the need to deal with human-wildlife conflicts, a type of human-wildlife interaction (HWI). To measure, monitor and solve conflicts is fundamental to achieve the coexistence necessary to promote environmental and social justice. Here, we present a new approach to assess and evaluate HWI aiming to inform decision-making regarding conflicts. We developed a method to classify and map events between humans and wildlife according to their nature, context and effect for both sides, distinguishing what an encounter (unidirectional) is and what an interaction (bidirectional effect) is. We typified and categorized HWI regarding their effects (positive or negative) for both sides. We compiled opportunistic observations from events between humans and wildlife in a shared landscape (campus Luiz de Queiroz, Piracicaba, S & atilde;o Paulo, Brazil) from February 2022 until April 2024. We created a standardized table, performed descriptive statistics, used Minimum Bounding Geometry and Kernel Density, a simple method idealized to assist scientists and managers in different contexts. We had a total of 570 events, of which 297 were characterized as encounters and 273 as HWI. We recorded 42 animal taxa related to the events, of which 36 interacted with humans, being Nasua nasua, Cairina moschata, and Didelphis albiventris the most frequent ones. We identified 16 types of HWI that can occur in shared landscapes, 10 were categorized as Human-Wildlife Conflict, six as Unsustainable Use, four as Wildlife Damage and three as Convivencia, with some classified in more than one category. Among them, 10 occurred in our studied landscape with Unintentional Feeding being the most frequent one. We classified for the first time Unexpected Encounter, Accident Avoidance and Chase Away as HWI. Spaces of interaction were close to main buildings, central lawn and cats' feeding sites. Our approach was useful to prioritize species and stakeholders, and to identify the large amount of food supply due to inadequate waste disposal and domestic cat feeding as the primary reason for most of HWI in our studied landscape. We recommend a comprehensive characterization of HWI to find interconnections and guide strategies for coexistence.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Human-Wildlife Interactions Predict Febrile Illness in Park Landscapes of Western Uganda
    Salerno, Jonathan
    Ross, Noam
    Ghai, Ria
    Mahero, Michael
    Travis, Dominic A.
    Gillespie, Thomas R.
    Hartter, Joel
    ECOHEALTH, 2017, 14 (04) : 675 - 690
  • [22] Human-wildlife interactions in urban ecosystems
    Soulsbury, Carl D.
    White, Piran C. L.
    WILDLIFE RESEARCH, 2015, 42 (07) : III - V
  • [23] Human-wildlife interactions in urban Asia
    Wierucka, Kaja
    Hatten, Chloe E. R.
    Murphy, Derek
    Allcock, John A.
    Andersson, Astrid A.
    Bojan, Jack W. N.
    Kong, Tsz Ching
    Kwok, Jun Kin
    Lam, Jack Y. K.
    Ma, Calvin H.
    Phalke, Sagarika
    Tilley, Hannah B.
    Wang, Rebecca S.
    Wang, Yifu
    Webster, Sam J.
    Mumby, Hannah S.
    Dingle, Caroline
    GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION, 2023, 46
  • [24] Human-Wildlife Interactions: 2019 in review
    Messmer, Terry A.
    HUMAN-WILDLIFE INTERACTIONS, 2019, 13 (03): : 365 - 365
  • [25] First global summit on human-wildlife conflict and coexistence
    Zimmermann, Alexandra
    ORYX, 2023, 57 (04) : 417 - 418
  • [26] Myths and assumptions about human-wildlife conflict and coexistence
    Treves, Adrian
    Santiago-Avila, Francisco J.
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2020, 34 (04) : 811 - 818
  • [27] Policy-making for peri-urban landscapes as arenas of human-wildlife interactions
    Roth, Annemarie Tabea
    Kleemann, Janina
    Spyra, Marcin
    URBAN ECOSYSTEMS, 2024, 27 (05) : 1707 - 1721
  • [28] Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence
    Jiren, Tolera Senbeto
    Riechers, Maraja
    Kansky, Ruth
    Fischer, Joern
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2021, 35 (06) : 1957 - 1965
  • [29] Understanding the prospects of human-wildlife coexistence: a conceptual framework
    Thapa, Avantika
    Mukherjee, Tanoy
    Pradhan, Aditya
    Chattopadhyay, Joydev
    BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION, 2024, 33 (13) : 3583 - 3615
  • [30] Indigenous insights on human-wildlife coexistence in southern India
    Jolly, Helina
    Satterfield, Terre
    Kandlikar, Milind
    Suma, T. R.
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2022, 36 (06)