Effects of Private‐Land Use,Livestock Management,and Human Tolerance on Diversity,Distribution, and Abundance of Large African Mammals

Successful conservation of large terrestrial mammals (wildlife) on private lands requires that landowners be empowered to manage wildlife so that benefits outweigh the costs. Laikipia County, Kenya, is predominantly unfenced, and the land uses in the area allow wide‐ranging wildlife to move freely between different management systems on private land. We used camera traps to sample large mammals associated with 4 different management systems (rhinoceros sanctuaries, no livestock; conservancies, intermediate stocking level; fenced ranches, high stocking level; and group ranches, high stocking level, no fencing, pastoralist clan ownership) to examine whether management and stocking levels affect wildlife. We deployed cameras at 522 locations across 8 properties from January 2008 through October 2010 and used the photographs taken during this period to estimate richness, occupancy, and relative abundance of species. Species richness was highest in conservancies and sanctuaries and lowest on fenced and group ranches. Occupancy estimates were, on average, 2 and 5 times higher in sanctuaries and conservancies as on fenced and group ranches, respectively. Nineteen species on fenced ranches and 25 species on group ranches were considered uncommon (occupancy < 0.1). The relative abundance of most species was highest or second highest in sanctuaries and conservancies. Lack of rights to manage and utilize wildlife and uncertain land tenure dampen many owners’ incentives to tolerate wildlife. We suggest national conservation strategies consider landscape‐level approaches to land‐use planning that aim to increase conserved areas by providing landowners with incentives to tolerate wildlife. Possible incentives include improving access to ecotourism benefits, forging agreements to maintain wildlife habitat and corridors, resolving land‐ownership conflicts, restoring degraded rangelands, expanding opportunities for grazing leases, and allowing direct benefits to landowners through wildlife harvesting. Efectos del Uso Privado de Suelo, Manejo de Ganado y la Tolerancia Humana sobre la Diversidad, Distribución y Abundancia de Mamíferos Mayores Africanos     

Effects of vulture declines on facultative scavengers and potential implications for mammalian disease transmission

Vultures (Accipitridae and Cathartidae) are the only known obligate scavengers. They feed on rotting carcasses and are the most threatened avian functional group in the world. Possible effects of vulture declines include longer persistence of carcasses and increasing abundance of and contact between facultative scavengers at these carcasses. These changes could increase rates of transmission of infectious diseases, with carcasses serving as hubs of infection. To evaluate these possibilities, we conducted a series of observations and experimental tests of the effects of vulture extirpation on decomposition rates of livestock carcasses and mammalian scavengers in Kenya. We examined whether the absence of vultures changed carcass decomposition time, number of mammalian scavengers visiting carcasses, time spent by mammals at carcasses, and potential for disease transmission at carcasses (measured by changes in intraspecific contact rates). In the absence of vultures, mean carcass decomposition rates nearly tripled. Furthermore, the mean number of mammals at carcasses increased 3-fold (from 1.5 to 4.4 individuals/carcass), and the average time spent by mammals at carcasses increased almost 3-fold (from 55 min to 143 min). There was a nearly 3-fold increase in the mean number of contacts between mammalian scavengers at carcasses without vultures. These results highlight the role of vultures in carcass decomposition and level of contact among mammalian scavengers. In combination, our findings lead us to hypothesize that changes in vulture abundance may affect patterns of disease transmission among mammalian carnivores.     

Effects of Fisheries Closures and Gear Restrictions on Fishing Income in a Kenyan Coral Reef

Abstract: The adoption of fisheries closures and gear restrictions in the conservation of coral reefs may be limited by poor understanding of the economic profitability of competing economic uses of marine resources. Over the past 12 years, I evaluated the effects of gear regulation and fisheries closures on per person and per area incomes from fishing in coral reefs of Kenya. In two of my study areas, the use of small‐meshed beach seines was stopped after 6 years; one of these areas was next to a fishery closure. In my third study area, fishing was unregulated. Fishing yields on per capita daily wet weight basis were 20% higher after seine‐net fishing was stopped. The per person daily fishing income adjacent to the closed areas was 14 and 22% higher than the fishing income at areas with only gear restrictions before and after the seine‐net restriction, respectively. Incomes differed because larger fish were captured next to the closed area and the price per weight (kilograms) increased as fish size increased and because catches adjacent to the closure contained fish species of higher market value. Per capita incomes were 41 and 135% higher for those who fished in gear‐restricted areas and near‐closed areas, respectively, compared with those who fished areas with no restrictions. On a per unit area basis (square kilometers), differences in fishing income among the three areas were not large because fishing effort increased as the number of restrictions decreased. Changes in catch were, however, larger and often in the opposite direction expected from changes in effort alone. For example, effort declined 21% but nominal profits per square kilometer (not accounting for inflation) increased 29% near the area with gear restrictions. Gear restrictions also reduced the cost of fishing and increased the proportion of self‐employed fishers.