Worldwide, subsistence farmers have expressed concerns about food shortage due to crop raiding by wildlife. We investigated the effects of crop-raiding on homestead food security of subsistence farmers on the edge of the Hluhluwe Game Reserve, South Africa. We collected data through field inspections of farms and questionnaire surveys. The dietary diversity of larger homesteads (6-8 people) was potentially reduced due to the higher number of crops lost. Larger households were more vulnerable to food insecurity as compared to smaller households (3-5 people). Generally, crop damage resulted in ZAR 2,427/annum (about USD 180.71) potential loss in income, reducing homestead income by 16.18%, and this effect was greater for larger compared to smaller homesteads. Our results suggest that larger homesteads are more prone to food insecurity than smaller homesteads in a rural subsistence farming community.

Across the globe, crop-raiding has been known to have a significant impact on subsistence farmers livelihoods in developing countries. However, the relationship between crop-raiding and food security of small-scale farmers is not well-studied. We investigated the effects of crop-raiding on homestead food security of a subsistence farming community on the edge of the Hluhluwe Game Reserve in northern KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. We analyzed the relative calories lost to important food security crops (maize, common bean, spinach, and beetroot) damage by crop raiders. In addition, we conducted questionnaire surveys of resident farmers and conservationists of the Hluhluwe Game Reserve to explain the effect of crop-raiding on food security. We firstly assessed how crop loss influenced relative calorie loss as an indicator of food security by comparing relative calorie loss with two predictors of food security: homestead size and contribution of crops to the farmers' food basket. Larger homesteads were more prone to food insecurity as compared to smaller households as they experienced higher calorie loss, especially in terms of maize (Zea mays), the most important food security crop in South Africa. This was because maize contributed the highest (91–100%) to the homestead food basket of these farmers. Secondly, we assessed farmers and conservationists' perceptions and opinions on crop-raiding issues. Farmers reported maize as the crop most damaged by crop-raiding animals. Conservationists reported crop-raiding with other major problems in and around the Reserve; this showed that conservationists acknowledge the issue of crop-raiding as a problem for subsistence farming communities abutting protected areas. Both farmers and conservationists reported insects as the most damaging crop raider. Our study suggests that larger homesteads, particularly where maize contributes substantially to homestead food baskets, are more prone to food insecurity in the rural subsistence farming community that we studied. In concordance with many studies, insects were reported as the culprits by both farmers and conservationists. Small, ubiquitous animals, such as insects are reported to cause much crop damage where they occur. The findings of our study suggest that the food security of the studied farmers is threatened by crop-raiding.

Multi-scale approaches have been used to determine scales at which mammal species are responding to habitat destruction due to invasion, but the impacts of weeds on mammals have not been extensively studied, especially in Africa. Inside the Groenkloof Nature Reserve (GNR), we assessed how mammals are affected by an invasive weed Lantana camara. A series of models were applied to determine the differences in species abundance as well as richness, separated for large and small mammals. When diversity indices were used, an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) revealed no statistically significant difference between treatments (F5 = 0.233, p = 0.945) for large mammals. The results of a Generalised Linear Mixed Model (GLMM) showed that vegetation type (Wald χ22 = 120.156; p < 0.01) and foraging guilds (Wald χ23 = 76.771; p < 0.01) were significant predictors of large mammal species richness. However, for small mammals, the results of a GLMM showed that only treatment type (Wald χ25 = 10.62; p = 0.050) was a significant predictor of the number of small mammals trapped. In addition, the ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences in species diversity between treatments (F5 = 0.934; p < 0.001) and by season (F1 = 9.122 p = 0.003) for small mammals. The presence of L. camara coupled with other predictors was associated with differences in large mammal abundances and diversity, and differences in how these large mammals were distributed across the landscape. Furthermore, the highest species diversity was found in the spring for small mammals. Therefore, for all the mammals studied, the presence of L. camara negatively affected species abundance, richness, and diversity, as well as how these species were distributed across the invaded and cleared areas.