Economic impact of wildlife predation on domestic animals in the Alberto Brenes Biological Reserve buffer zone, Costa Rica
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22458/urj.v14i1.4007Keywords:
conservation, jaguar, protected areas, puma, wildlife.Abstract
Introduction: The size of protected areas is often insufficient for viable predator populations, which causes habitats overlap with humans. The resulting conflicts, for example, predation on domestic animals, negatively affect both wildlife and human well-being. Objective: To estimate the economic impact of human-wildlife conflicts in the Alberto Brenes Biological Reserve, Alajuela, Costa Rica. Methods: Between October 2017 and April 2018, we interviewed 59 property managers in and near the reserve’s buffer zone. They were chosen from conflict reports and “snowball” references. Results: Wild animals killed 1 846 domestic animals from 2000 to 2018, with an economic loss of $48 000. The Coyote, Canis latrans, killed 1 074 animals, worth $4 000; equivalent data: felines 261 animals, $21 000; snakes 33 animals (Fer-the-lance, Bothrops asper: $18 000). Veterinary treatment for 28 surviving animals cost $3 000. Conclusion: While the Coyote killed more animals, felines and snakes produced the highest economic cost. Appropriate institutional intervention would reduce the problem.
References
Almanza, F. (2002). Caracterización de la depredación de animales domésticos por grandes felinos (Panthera onca y Puma concolor) y su presencia en zonas rurales de Costa Rica 1990-2000 [Tesis de Maestría no publicada]. Universidad Nacional, Heredia, Costa Rica.
Amador-Alcalá, S., Naranjo, E. J., & Jiménez-Ferrer, G. (2013). Wildlife predation on livestock and poultry: implications for predator conservation in the rainforest of south-east Mexico. Oryx, 47(2), 243-250. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605311001359
Amit, R., Rojas, K., Alfaro, L.D., & Carrillo, E. (2009). Conservación de felinos y sus presas dentro de fincas ganaderas (Informe Técnico). Programa Jaguar-ICOMVIS-UNA.
Bhatia, S., Redpath, S.M., Suryawanshi, K., & Mishra, C. (2020). Beyond conflict: exploring the spectrum of human–wildlife interactions and their underlying mechanisms. Oryx, 54(5), 621-628. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003060531800159X
Carvalho, L.F., Guadagnin, D.L., Maltchik, L., & dos Santos, J.E. (2012). Ecological, legal, and methodological principles for planning buffer zones. Natureza & Conservação, 10(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.4322/natcon.00901001
Cui, Q., Ren, Y., & Xu, H. (2021). The escalating effects of wildlife tourism on human–wildlife conflict. Animals, 11(5), 1378. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051378
Davies-Mostert, H., Hodkinson, C., Komen, H., & Snow, T. (2007). Predators and farmers. Endangered Wildlife Trust.
Dellinger, J.A., Macon, D.K., Rudd, J.L., Clifford, D.L., & Torres, S.G. (2021). Temporal trends and drivers of mountain lion depredation in California, USA. Human–Wildlife Interactions, 15(1), 162–177.
Gordillo, J. (2010). Depredación de ganado por jaguares y pumas en el noreste de Costa Rica y la percepción de los finqueros hacia ese problema [Tesis de Maestría, Universidad Nacional]. https://bit.ly/3xe6kel
Guerisoli, M.d.l.M., Luengos, E., Franchini, M., Caruso, N., Casanave, E.B., & Lucherini, M. (2017). Characterization of puma–livestock conflicts in rangelands of central Argentina. Royal Society Open Science, 4(12), 170852. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.170852
Hidalgo‐Mihart, M. G., Cantú‐Salazar, L., González‐Romero, A., & López‐González, C. A. (2004). Historical and present distribution of coyote (Canis latrans) in Mexico and Central America. Journal of Biogeography, 31(12), 2025-2038.
Hoogesteijn, R., & Hoogesteijn, A. (2005). Manual sobre problemas de depredación causados por grandes felinos en hatos ganaderos. Wildlife Conservation Society.
König, H.J., Ceauşu, S., Reed, M., Kendall, H., Hemminger, K., Reinke, H., Ostermann-Miyashita, E-F., Wenz, E., Eufemia, L., Hermanns, T., Klose, T., Spyra, M., Kuemmerle, T., & Ford, A. T. (2021). Integrated framework for stakeholder participation: Methods and tools for identifying and addressing human–wildlife conflicts. Conservation Science and Practice, 2021,3(3), e399. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.39
Kusler, A., Sarno, R., Soto, N., Elbroch, L.M., & Griegione, M. (2017). Local perceptions of puma-livestock conflict surrounding Torres Del Paine NP, Chile. CATnews, (65), 13-16.
Leenders, T. (2016). Amphibians of Costa Rica: a field guide. Cornell University Press.
Llanos, R., Andrade, A., & Travaini, A. (2020). Puma and livestock in central Patagonia (Argentina): from ranchers’ perceptions to predator management. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 25(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2019.1668987
Li, W., Wang, Z., & Tang, H. (1999). Designing the buffer zone of a nature reserve: a case study in Yancheng Biosphere Reserve, China. Biological Conservation, 90(3),159-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0006-3207(99)00011-7
Marchini, S. (2014). Who’s in conflict with whom? Human dimensions of the conflicts involving wildlife. En L.M. Verdade, M.C. Lyra-Jorge, & C.I. Piña (Eds.), Applied ecology and human dimensions in biological conservation (pp. 189-209). Springer.
Mora, J.M., & Ruedas, L. A. (2018). Sylvilagus dicei Harris, 1932. En A.T. Smith, C.H. Johnston, P.C. Alves, & K. Hackländer (Eds.), Lagomorphs - Pikas, Rabbits, and Hares of the World. (pp. 135-137). Johns Hopkins University Press.
Morazán, F., Amit, R., & Carrillo, E. (2010). Depredación de animales domésticos por carnívoros silvestres en el Área de Conservación Cordillera Volcánica Central. Informe Técnico. Programa Jaguar–UNA y Escuela de Ciencias Biológicas.
Moya, M.M., & Brenes, L. (2017). Rutas turísticas en la zona de amortiguamiento de la Reserva Biológica Alberto Manuel Brenes (ReBAMB). Pensamiento Actual, 17(Supl. 1): 1-10.
Nyhus, P. J. (2016). Human–wildlife conflict and coexistence. Annual review of environment and resources, 41, 143-171. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085634
Peña-Mondragón, J.L., & Castillo, A. (2013). Depredación de ganado por jaguar y otros carnívoros en el noreste de México. Therya, 4(3), 431-446. https://doi.org/10.12933/therya-13-153
Primack, R.B. (2002). Essentials of conservation biology (3rd ed.). Sinauer Associates.
Pringle, R.M. (2017). Upgrading protected areas to conserve wild biodiversity. Nature, 546(7656), 91-99. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22902
Romañach, S., Lindsey, P.A., & Woodroffe, R. (2011). Attitudes Toward Predators and Options for Their Conservation in the Ewaso Ecosystem. In N.J. Georgiadis (Ed.), Conserving Wildlife in African Landscapes Kenya’s Ewaso Ecosystem (pp. 85-93). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology number 632. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.632.85
Scharhag, J.M., Sartini, C., Crimmins, S.M., Hygnstrom, S.E., & Stetz, J.B. (2021). Characteristics of non-fatal attacks by black bears: conterminous United States, 2000-2017. Human-Wildlife Interactions, 15(1), 191-202. https://doi.org/10.26077/f70c-9dbf
Shwiff, S.A., Sweeney, S.J., Elser, J.L., Miller, R.S., Farnsworth, M.L., Nol, P., Shwiff, S.S., & Anderson, A.M. (2016). A benefit-cost analysis decision framework for mitigation of disease transmission at the wildlife–livestock interface. Human–Wildlife Interactions, 10(1), 91-102.
van Eeden, L.M., Crowther, M.S., Dickman, C.R., Macdonald, D.W., Ripple, W.J., Ritchie, E.G., & Newsome, T.M. (2018). Managing conflict between large carnivores and livestock. Conservation Biology, 32(1), 26-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12959
Woodroffe, R., & Ginsberg, J.R. (1998). Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science, 280(5372), 2126-2128.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 UNED Research Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Note: This abstract contains an incorrect copyright due to technical issues. Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms: Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal
All journal contents are freely available through a CC BY 4.0 license.
CC BY 4.0 is a Creative Commons: you can copy, modify, distribute, and perform, even for commercial reasons, without asking permission, if you give appropriate credit.
Contents can be reproduced if the source and copyright are acknowledged according to the Open Access license CC BY 4.0. Self-storage in preprint servers and repositories is allowed for all versions. We encourage authors to publish raw data and data logs in public repositories and to include the links with all drafts so that reviewers and readers can consult them at any time.
The journal is financed by public funds via Universidad Estatal a Distancia and editorial independence and ethical compliance are guaranteed by the Board of Editors, UNED. We do not publish paid ads or receive funds from companies.