The last African white giraffes live in farmers’ fields

Abstract

The giraffe population (Giraffa camelopardalis) in Niger is the last representative of the peralta sub-species which lived throughout West Africa at the beginning of the twentieth century. Protected since the 1970s, giraffes cohabit with humans in cultivated landscapes. This may not have appeared to pose many problems in the past, but the relationship between farmers and giraffes has deteriorated with the expansion of cultivated land and that of the giraffe population, with reported cases of giraffes damaging crops. A survey was conducted in all the affected villages in the Kouré area to establish the nature, severity and distribution of the damage and to evaluate the local populations' perception of the problem. Cowpeas are fed upon in the field at harvest time and in the granaries, as well as ripe mangoes, during the most critical period for giraffes' nutrition. The vast majority of farmers interviewed consider giraffes to be rather a problem in spite of tourism revenues they can obtain from them. This opinion has individually little correlation with damage rate on crops or easy access to tourism revenues. The damage risk factors are first and foremost considered as uncontrollable by the farmers, even if technical protection measures could easily be put in place locally. The inter-relationships between the socio-economic context and the way the problem is perceived are discussed.

Pastoralists' Perceptions of the Endangered Grevy's Zebra in Kenya

“…In most cases, those who owned more livestock held a more positive attitude toward wildlife (Hazzah et al, 2009;Parry & Campbell, 1992;Romaňach et al, 2010). Leroy et al (2009) found that owning livestock was the only predictor of a positive attitude toward white giraffes in Niger. In contrast, Tessema et al (2010) found that positive views of wildlife were correlated with owners of smaller herds in Ethiopia.…”

“…Studies have sought to understand how local perspectives and attitudes shape individual behavior as related to specific wildlife species as well as biological conservation. Most studies show an overall positive view of different wildlife species and their conservation (Gusset et al, 2008;Hu et al, 2010;Scanlon & Kull, 2009;Tessema, Liliehom, Ashenafi, & Leader-Williams, 2004) although some studies found opposite results, usually in the case of predators (Gusset et al, 2008;Leroy, de Visscher, Halidou, & Boureima, 2009;Romaňach, Lindsey, & Woodroffe, 2010).…”

“…The most often cited reason for supporting the conservation of wildlife is the obtainment of tangible benefits, including tourism, hunting, jobs, revenue, meat, and infrastructure by local people (Bruyere et al, 2009;Leroy et al, 2009;Romaňach et al, 2010;Scanlon & Kull, 2009;Tessema et al, 2010;Tomićević et al, 2010;Vodouhê et al, 2010). A few studies mentioned that locals perceive intangible benefits from wildlife and conservation, such as pride and connection to culture (Kuriyan, 2002;Tomićević et al, 2010;Tessema et al, 2010;Vodouhê et al, 2010), but these were the minority.…”

“…Local people whose livelihoods are threatened by wildlife are more likely to negatively view and behave toward wildlife (Leroy et al, 2009;Gillingham & Lee, 1999). This may be due to local people being dependent in part on bush meat for protein but unable to hunt due to strict prohibitions for doing so (Parry & Campbell, 1992).…”

Natural resource management by rural citizens in developing countries: innovations still required

“…The paper by Leroy et al (2009)demonstrates that farming and biodiversity conservation need not be antagonistic. That giraffes share with farmers the same land is simply refreshing news and reminds us that it should ideally be the rule rather than the exception.…”