Evaluating the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures as a human‐carnivore conflict mitigation tool in Tanzania's Ruaha landscape

Abstract Conflict with humans, particularly over livestock predation, poses a severe and continuing threat to the conservation of large carnivores, particularly in reserve‐adjacent and unprotected areas. Such conflict also inflicts substantial costs on people living alongside large carnivores. Though conflict is complex, attacks upon livestock are one of the factors that drive immediate hostility toward carnivores, inflict economic damage upon livestock‐keepers, and can lead to retaliatory and preventative carnivore killing. Many conflict mitigation and livestock protection approaches exist, but it is crucial to examine their effectiveness. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures in reducing predation of livestock in an area surrounding Ruaha National Park in southern Tanzania. These fortified enclosures are built with chain‐link fences and are aimed to replace the traditional enclosures built with acacia thorn branches. We implemented a before‐after‐control‐impact (BACI) design to test the short‐term impacts of the fortified enclosure intervention. We then conducted a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) based on costs of construction of fortified enclosures and benefits accruing as prevented livestock depredation. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that fortified enclosures would diminish in effectiveness over time as carnivores become habituated, the fortification deteriorates due to lack of maintenance, and/or predation risk would increase. For the long‐term analysis, we used monthly data from 758 livestock‐keeping households from 2010 to 2016. Across both short‐ and long‐term analyses, fortified enclosures were effective at reducing the odds of experiencing predation of livestock by carnivores by 94% and 60%, respectively. Based on mean predation rates (c. 0.10 livestock month) and observed reductions, the benefit/cost ratios over 5 years of construction of a fortified enclosure with metal or wooden poles are 3.36 and 7.89, respectively, when subsidized. Our study contributes actionable evidence on the impact of an intervention to inform conservation strategies supporting human–carnivore coexistence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conservation Science and Practice
Published
2025-01-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13299
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
12.01

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures as a human‐carnivore conflict mitigation tool in Tanzania's Ruaha landscape

Jonathan Salerno, Alayne Cotterill, Amy Dickman, Ana Grau et al.
7 citations
Conservation Science and Practice
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
12.01
article

Evaluating the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures as a human‐carnivore conflict mitigation tool in Tanzania's Ruaha landscape

Jonathan Salerno, Alayne Cotterill, Amy Dickman, Ana Grau, Tom Hilton, Asanterabi Lowasa
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Abstract Conflict with humans, particularly over livestock predation, poses a severe and continuing threat to the conservation of large carnivores, particularly in reserve‐adjacent and unprotected areas. Such conflict also inflicts substantial costs on people living alongside large carnivores. Though conflict is complex, attacks upon livestock are one of the factors that drive immediate hostility toward carnivores, inflict economic damage upon livestock‐keepers, and can lead to retaliatory and preventative carnivore killing. Many conflict mitigation and livestock protection approaches exist, but it is crucial to examine their effectiveness. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures in reducing predation of livestock in an area surrounding Ruaha National Park in southern Tanzania. These fortified enclosures are built with chain‐link fences and are aimed to replace the traditional enclosures built with acacia thorn branches. We implemented a before‐after‐control‐impact (BACI) design to test the short‐term impacts of the fortified enclosure intervention. We then conducted a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) based on costs of construction of fortified enclosures and benefits accruing as prevented livestock depredation. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that fortified enclosures would diminish in effectiveness over time as carnivores become habituated, the fortification deteriorates due to lack of maintenance, and/or predation risk would increase. For the long‐term analysis, we used monthly data from 758 livestock‐keeping households from 2010 to 2016. Across both short‐ and long‐term analyses, fortified enclosures were effective at reducing the odds of experiencing predation of livestock by carnivores by 94% and 60%, respectively. Based on mean predation rates (c. 0.10 livestock month) and observed reductions, the benefit/cost ratios over 5 years of construction of a fortified enclosure with metal or wooden poles are 3.36 and 7.89, respectively, when subsidized. Our study contributes actionable evidence on the impact of an intervention to inform conservation strategies supporting human–carnivore coexistence.

Conservation Science and PracticeVol. 7(2)
Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TZ), Iringa Mercy Organization (TZ), Colorado State University (US)
National Geographic Society, People's Trust for Endangered Species, Tusk Trust
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
12.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.