4.3 Article

Socio-economic consequences of cattle predation by the Endangered Persian leopard Panthera pardus saxicolor in a Caucasian conflict hotspot, northern Iran

期刊

ORYX
卷 51, 期 1, 页码 124-130

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0030605315000903

关键词

Attitudes; Caucasus; compensation; conflict mitigation; conservation; human-carnivore conflict; leopard

资金

  1. People's Trust for Endangered Species

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the Caucasus the Endangered Persian leopard Panthera pardus saxicolor has been persecuted to the verge of extinction, primarily as a result of conflict with people over livestock predation. The socio-economic factors that influence this interaction have received little attention and the attitudes of local people towards leopards remain unknown. Here we assess the extent of cattle predation by leopards and how this influences people's attitudes towards leopards among village residents around the Dorfak No-Hunting Area, a priority reserve in the Iranian Caucasus. In a survey of 66 households, 48% of interviewees reported losing cattle to leopards during 2009-2011. A mean of c. 0.7 head of cattle per interviewed household was reportedly killed by leopards over the 3-year survey period. Cattle predation peaked during warm seasons, when most family members were busy with rice farming-related activities, thus leaving their cattle grazing unguarded in the forest. Regardless of the intensity of cattle predation or socioeconomic status, 80% of respondents perceived leopards as a pest, with 45% of interviewees expressing support for either licensed hunting or culling of the Dorfak leopards. We recommend that the Iranian government considers the financial consequences of livestock loss for poor rural communities across the leopard's range. In addition, a combination of different livestock husbandry practices, with the direct involvement of local residents, is essential to ensure the long-term survival of the regional leopard population of the Caucasus.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据