- 期刊
- OpenAccess
Impacts of Wildlife-Livestock Interactions in and around Arusha National Park, Tanzania
並列摘要
The study on the impacts of wildlife-livestock interactions within and around Arusha National Park (Tanzania) was conducted in 2010. The purpose was to investigate on the factors influencing these interactions and their respective impacts to the conservation initiatives and the wellbeing of local communities around Arusha National Park (ANAPA). Data collection methods included structured questionnaires, checklists and researcher's personal field observations. A sample of 60 households was randomly selected from three (3) villages namely Ngurdoto, Ngongongare and Engarenanyuki that are directly bordering the park. Data were analyzed by using SPSS 16 computer program. Five factors influencing wildlife-livestock contacts were identified, the most significant being wildlife habitat loss and drought. Generally, no diseases were identified inside the park but to livestock keepers; the tick-borne disease, East Coast Fever (ECF) was a great threat as it caused large economic losses. This was more worsened with the ECF's high case fatality rate coupled with unaffordable treatment costs to most livestock keepers (68% of respondents). About 623 cattle deaths that happened in the study villages in year 2009 and 2010 were attributed to ECF. However, in the northern Tanzania including Arusha region where ANAPA is located, there was a severe drought in the same years (2009/10) that might have predisposed the livestock to disease conditions and ultimate deaths. Elephants (Loxodonta africana), warthogs (Phacochoerus africanus), buffaloes (Syncerus caffer), vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus) and dik dik (Madoqua kirkii) were identified to be the wildlife species that frequently interacted with livestock in the outskirts of the park. Spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta) was pointed out to be the most problematic wild carnivore that attacks goats and sheep, mostly during night times. It is recommended that further encroachment of wildlife protected areas and blockage of wildlife migratory routes should be halted, range improvement practices should be promoted, public education on the effects of wildlifelivestock interactions should be provided to the local people. Preponderantly, prophylactic measures that include dipping in acaricide and vaccination against diseases of domestic animals should be facilitated. Preferably, this should be incorporated into the park outreach programs in order to combat the diseases. Nonetheless, livestock diseases are still potential threat to wildlife conservation initiatives, therefore efforts should be made to control them if sustainable wildlife conservation is to be attained.