Most such studies have concentrated on the impacts of either just one large carnivore, or all as a whole, rather than the varied impacts that large carnivore species may have in intact multi-predator-prey ecosystems. Experimentally testing the behavioural responses of ungulates to different large carnivores is a necessary first step in understanding these likely differing impacts.

In the Greater Kruger National Park in South Africa, the research team examined the fearfulness that ungulates displayed in response to playbacks of lion, African wild dog, cheetah, or non-predator control (bird) vocalizations.

The researchers initially gathered audio recordings of lions, cheetahs, and African wild dogs as well as bird calls to use as a control treatment in order to examine ungulates’ reactions to various sounds. Instead of roaring, they used only short-range sounds like snarls and growls to imitate the proximity of a predator. Then, they used a speaker attached to a video trap to broadcast these scary sounds to wild animals. The speaker was activated to broadcast a predator sound when the camera sensed an animal moving in the area and began recording a video.

Ungulates reacted most fearfully to lions, then wild dogs, and last cheetahs, showing a highly distinct hierarchy of fear. Lion sounds caught the attention of ungulates the most. Notably, the patterns found were not predicted by the death rates (hunting success rates) of the prey species for each predator.

This “hierarchy of fear” is crucial, according to Liana Zanette, a wildlife ecologist at Western University in Canada and a coauthor of the study. Fear influences every element of a prey animal’s behaviour and can have a ripple impact on the environment.

These findings show that various large carnivores cause ungulate prey to exhibit varying degrees of anxiety, resulting in various community-level effects, which ultimately has an impact on vegetation development and landscape features – and potentially even climate. This shows the importance of halting the ongoing global decline and extinction of large carnivores.

Source: Behavioral Ecology
Photo: Brianna R./Unsplash

The post Ecology of fear in a South African savanna appeared first on African Conservation Foundation.

While current approaches tend to focus on separating livestock from wild carnivores, for instance through fencing or lethal control, this is not always possible or desirable. Alternative and effective non-lethal tools that protect both large carnivores and livelihoods are urgently needed.

In a new study we describe how painting eyes on the backsides of livestock can protect them from attack.

Many big cats – including lions, leopards, and tigers – are ambush predators. This means that they rely on stalking their prey and retaining the element of surprise. In some cases, being seen by their prey can lead them to abandon the hunt. We tested whether we could hack into this response to reduce livestock losses to lions and leopards in Botswana’s Okavango delta region.

This delta, in north-west Botswana, has permanent marshlands and seasonally flooded plains which host a wide variety of wildlife. It’s a Unesco world heritage site and parts of the delta are protected. However, though livestock are excluded, the cordon fence is primarily intended to prevent contact and disease transmission between cattle and Cape buffalo. Large carnivores, and other wildlife including elephants, are able to move freely across it, and livestock losses to large carnivores are common in the area. In response, lethal control through shooting and poisoning can occur.

While the initial focus of the study was ambush predators generally, it soon became clear that lions were responsible for most of it. During the study, for instance, lions killed 18 cattle, a leopard killed one beast, and spotted hyaenas killed three.

Ultimately, our study found that lions were less likely to attack cattle if they had eyes painted on their rumps. This suggests that this simple and cost-effective technique can be added to the coexistence toolbox, where ambush predators are involved.

Eye-catching solution

Conflict between farmers and wildlife can be intense along the borders of protected areas, with many communities bearing significant costs of coexisting with wildlife. The edge of the Okavango delta in Botswana is no exception, where farmers operate small non-commercial livestock enterprises.

Livestock rub shoulders with lions, leopards, spotted hyaenas, cheetahs, and African wild dogs. To protect the cattle, herds (anything between about six and 100 individual cattle) are kept within predator-proof enclosures overnight. However, they generally graze unattended for most of the day, when the vast majority of predation occurs.

Working with Botswana Predator Conservation and local herders, we painted cattle from 14 herds that had recently suffered lion attacks. Over four years, a total of 2,061 cattle were involved in the study.

Before release from their overnight enclosure, we painted about one-third of each herd with an artificial eye-spot design on the rump, one-third with simple cross-marks, and left the remaining third of the herd unmarked. We carried out 49 painting sessions and each of these lasted for 24 days.

The cattle were also collared and all foraged in the same area and moved similarly, suggesting they were exposed to similar risk. However the individuals painted with artificial eye-spots were significantly more likely to survive than unpainted or cross-painted control cattle within the same herd.

In fact, none of the 683 painted “eye-cows” were killed by ambush predators during the four-year study, while 15 (of 835) unpainted, and 4 (of 543) cross-painted cattle were killed.

These results supported our initial hunch that creating the perception that the predator had been seen by the prey would lead it to abandon the hunt.

But there were also some surprises.

Cattle marked with simple crosses were significantly more likely to survive than unmarked cattle from the same herd. This suggests that cross-marks were better than no marks at all, which was unexpected.

From a theoretical perspective, these results are interesting. Although eye patterns are common in many animal groups, notably butterflies, fishes, amphibians, and birds, no mammals are known to have natural eye-shaped patterns that deter predation. In fact, to our knowledge, our research is the first time that eye-spots have been shown to deter large mammalian predators.

Previous work on human responses to eye patterns however do generally support the detection hypothesis, perhaps suggesting the presence of an inherent response to eyes that could be exploited to modify behaviour in practical situations, such as to prevent human-wildlife conflicts, and reduce criminal activity in humans.

Possible limitations

First, it is important to realise that, in our experimental design, there were always unmarked cattle in the herd. Consequently, it is unclear whether painting would still be effective if these proverbial “sacrificial lambs” were not still on the menu. Further research could uncover this, but in the meantime applying artificial marks to the highest-value individuals within the herd may be most pragmatic.

Second, it is important to consider habituation, meaning that predators may get used to and eventually ignore the deterrent. This is a fundamental issue for nearly all non-lethal approaches. Whether the technique remains effective in the longer term is not yet known in this case.

Protecting livestock from wild carnivores – while conserving carnivores themselves – is an important and complex issue that requires the application of a suite of tools, including practical and social interventions. While adding the eye-cow technique to the carnivore-livestock conflict prevention toolbox, we note that no single tool is likely to be a silver bullet. Indeed, we must do better than a silver bullet if we are to ensure the successful coexistence of livestock and large carnivores. Nevertheless, as part of an expanding non-lethal toolkit, we hope that this simple, low-cost approach could reduce the costs of coexistence for some farmers.

Dr J Weldon McNutt (Director, Botswana Predator Conservation) and Tshepo Ditlhabang (Coexistence Officer, Botswana Predator Conservation) contributed to this article.

Neil R Jordan, Lecturer, UNSW; Cameron Radford, PhD Candidate, UNSW, and Tracey Rogers, Associate Professor Evolution & Ecology, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Lions are less likely to attack cattle with eyes painted on their backsides appeared first on African Conservation Foundation.

The research, a collaboration involving University of Queensland and Griffith University, published in Frontiers in Ecology & Evolution,and Ecological Solutions and Evidence, found that current lion counting methods for research/conservation purposes may be overestimating lion numbers and densities.

Lead author Alexander Braczkowski, formerly at University of Queensland, now a research associate at the Environmental Futures Research Institute

“African lions are one of the world’s most loved animal species and for that reason they garner both conservation attention and funding,” Mr Braczkowski said.

“Yet some experts believe their populations have experienced a 50% decline since 1994 when, coincidentally, Disney’s The Lion King was released.

“Current calculations indicate between 20,000 and 30,000 remain in the wild, scattered across 102 populations in Africa, however, our research suggests these numbers may be substantially lower.

“Most African lion abundance and density estimates are based upon track counts, audio lure surveys and expert solicitation – which are simply not informative enough to understand how lion populations are doing over time.”

According to Mr Braczkowski, as outlined in Frontiers in Ecology & Evolution, the methods being used to calculate lion abundance and density is lagging behind those adopted for other big cats, such as tigers, leopards and jaguars.

“Only by using long-term surveys using photographic methods to identify individual lions can you accurately track changes in population size, survival, density and sex-specific movements.

“Monitoring these parameters over time provides important insights into population health, that current methods like audio surveys or track counts, can’t. For example, our study demonstrated that large home ranges and skewed sex-ratios, can signal prey depletion and imminent population collapse.

“This technique, developed in the Maasai Mara by co-authors Dr Nic Elliot and Dr Arjun Gopalaswamy, compiles data on lion identities and their location, and subsequently uses power computers to determine the changes in lion density across the landscape.”

In their second research paper, Mr Braczkowski and colleagues assessed the ability of this technique to better understand the status of lions in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda.

“This was the perfect place to use this approach since lions in Queen Elizabeth National Park spend a lot of their time up in trees, and it is relatively straightforward to get good pictures of them,” Mr Braczkowski.

“This lion population also carries great local tourism value, with each lion estimated to raise about USD$14,000 annually.

“Queen Elizabeth National Park is an unusual site where lions, owing to their unique tree-climbing behaviour are frequently seen by managers and tourists.”

“It is alarming to note that many continent-wide figures on African lion numbers are not backed by rigorous on-ground surveys,” said Dr Duan Biggs, a co-author on the studies from Griffith University.

“Accurate site-based estimates of lion population size are crucial to assess the effectiveness of conservation interventions.”

Mr Braczkowski and colleagues found lions in Queen Elizabeth National Park were now moving more and have larger home range sizes compared to the previous study conducted about a decade ago.

“Since larger home range sizes in big cats are often associated with lower animal densities due to less available prey, this is a concerning trend,” said Dr Arjun Gopalaswamy, a co-author and science advisor to the Wildlife Conservation Society’s Global Programs.

“There’s great value in using methods that keep track of lion populations directly and we urge conservation and research communities to cease using ad hoc, indirect methods and shift to more reliable and direct methods.”

“In light of the conservation threat due to the collapse in tourism in Africa it is now more urgent than ever to have accurate, reliable monitoring of lion numbers on the continent,” said Mr Braczkowski.

“It appears this is starting to happen, with the method being adopted by the Kenya Wildlife Service and partners to survey lions and other carnivores across Kenya.”

Source: Griffith University

The post Lion conservation strategies start with good counts appeared first on African Conservation Foundation.

In southern Africa, 62% of leopard distribution falls outside of formally protected areas. This unprotected landscape is highly fragmented by both agriculture and urban development.

Threats to leopards include habitat fragmentation, killing for fear of livestock loss and poorly managed trophy hunting. Leopards are poached through deliberate or opportunistic poisoning and wire-snaring. Their body parts are also illegally traded for traditional medicine and cultural attire.

Conservationists are concerned that these threats contribute to the overall decline in leopard numbers. Conserving leopards successfully requires us to track population numbers and trends. However, leopards are notoriously elusive and occur at low densities, which makes monitoring difficult.

Threats to many wild cat populations across southern Africa are often age and sex-biased. How these threats influence leopard behaviour is poorly understood.

The research

Our study explored the long-term genetic costs of exploitation-driven changes in the behaviour of leopards. To do this we compared the social and genetic structure of two well-studied populations in South Africa; a protected population and one recovering from over-exploitation since 2005, where 50% of leopard deaths were human-related.

Using GPS collars, guide sightings and genetic samples, we gathered over 15 years of data to reconstruct home ranges and family pedigrees for 150 leopards across both reserves. This allowed us to examine the behaviour of related individuals over multiple generations, with and without exploitation.

Typically, female leopards establish territories close to their mothers, while males settle away from their natal range. At sexual maturity (~3 years), sons compete with surrounding males for access to territory and mates. Often overcome by these large established males, sons are forced to disperse out of the area, creating a “genetic out-breeding effect”. By “moving out” to establish a territory away from “home”, sons avoid breeding with closely related females.

Inbreeding at the level of sisters, mothers and aunts can have severe consequences in big cats. These range from physical defects like tail “kinks”, to severe reproductive costs and even sterility.

In both populations, we found that daughters established home ranges near their mothers. Here they benefit from the resource knowledge of their mother’s territory. In the fully protected population, sons dispersed out of their maternal home ranges, moving away from closely related females.

But in the historically over-exploited population, many young males did not disperse. Instead, their newly established home ranges overlapped with those of their sisters, mothers and aunts. Here, territory “gaps”, created by the killing of large males, allowed sons to escape competition and establish territories alongside their mothers.

The problem? Males in the exploited population stopped dispersing and, as a result, destabilised the out-breeding mechanism for this population. This increased the likelihood of young males fathering cubs with closely related females.

We found evidence of this with a father-daughter and two half-sibling mating events. Known breeding pairs in this population were also highly related, the equivalent of at least half-siblings. While the overall population was growing, it retained signatures of inbreeding despite over 10 years of recovery.

What does this mean for leopard conservation?

The risk of inbreeding in small, over-exploited populations is well known. However, few studies have the necessary long-term data to demonstrate this direct link. We show clear evidence of how exploitation can disrupt the dispersal behaviour of leopards, ultimately leading to inbreeding.

Our study is among the first to demonstrate these risks in a large solitary wild cat species. We emphasise that even “recovering” populations still carry the inbreeding “scars” of historical exploitation. While reduced genetic diversity exposes populations to the challenges of future disturbances, including disease outbreak, habitat loss and climate change.

Increasing evidence suggests most leopard populations across southern Africa are threatened by exploitation. Long-term genetic costs should stimulate discussion among scientists, reserve managers and policymakers who aim to effectively conserve this species.

The recovery of leopard numbers in historically exploited protected areas is crucial to safeguarding the 62% of unprotected leopard range from loss. Promoting movement between reserves to encourage gene flow requires suitable wildlife corridors for leopards, even through already transformed land.

Left unregulated, the unsustainable exploitation of leopards will have severe ecological and evolutionary costs. We have demonstrated that removing too many individuals, especially of a particular age or sex, can destabilise a population. By changing the social dynamics of individual behaviour and this increases the chance of inbreeding.

Population monitoring of leopards indicates that habitat loss and population declines are similar to lion and rhino. Yet their silent disappearance goes largely unnoticed due to their broad distribution and elusive nature. We have only just begun to understand and effectively conserve these magnificent cats.

Vincent Naude, PhD student, University of Cape Town; Guy Balme, Honorary Research Associate, University of Cape Town, and Jacqueline Bishop, Senior Lecturer in Conservation Biology, University of Cape Town

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Exploitation changes leopard behaviour with long-term genetic costs appeared first on African Conservation Foundation.

The details of Cecil’s killing are disturbing — and they’re important for understanding why this has become such a controversy.

The majestic lion was lured out of a national park with food, shot with a crossbow, tracked for 40 more hours, then finally killed with a gun the following morning, before being beheaded and skinned.

“Large, powerful, but regal”

Cecil was a famous and beloved lion in Hwange National Park, known as the ‘Pride of Zimbabwe’. He was identifiable by his unique black-fringed mane. 

The lions in the park have been studied by scientists from the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU) at Oxford University as part of a scientific project that has run since 1999 and his movements had been followed since 2008.

“Cecil was the ultimate lion,” says Brent Stapelkamp, a field researcher with Oxford University’s WildCRU, who knew Cecil perhaps better than anyone else.”He was everything that a lion represents to us as humans,” Stapelkamp says. “He was large, powerful, but regal at the same time.”

“The collaring of lions like Cecil have given us a vast amount of knowledge about lions and their behavior in the environment,” Stapelkamp told National Geographic.

Global outrage grows

The death of Cecil the lion triggered widespread rage, indignation, even disgust and horror. Palmer received a flood of hate messages and activists posted the dentist’s private details online. Protesters gathered outside Palmer’s dentist office, where services have been discontinued in the midst of the controversy.

Famous primatologist and conservationist Jane Goodall spoke about Cecil, saying, “He was not even killed outright, but suffered for hours before finally being shot with a bullet … And this behaviour is described as a ‘sport.'”

“Only one good thing comes out of this,” she said. “Thousands of people have read the story and have also been shocked. Their eyes opened to the dark side of human nature. Surely they will now be more prepared to fight for the protection of wild animals and the wild places where they live. Therein lies the hope.”

Blood Lions

The film Blood Lions premiered on 22 July at the Durban International Film Festival. The film uncovers the ugly story behind South Africa’s predator breeding and canned lion hunting industry

Blood Lions follows acclaimed environmental journalist and safari operator Ian Michler, and Rick Swazey, an American hunter, on their journey to uncover the realities about the multi-million dollar predator breeding and canned lion hunting industries in South Africa.

It is a story that blows the lid off claims made by these operators in attempting to justify what they do. Last year alone over 800 captive lions were shot in South Africa, mostly by wealthy international hunters under conditions that are anything but sporting.

In conjunction with the film, a Blood Lions campaign has also been launched with the aim of putting an end to this practice where, “at least two or three captive bred or tamed lions are being killed in canned hunts each day in South Africa.

Celebrities

Cecil’s death created an outrage among animal conservationists, prompted responses from politicians and many other people. A number of celebrities publicly condemned Cecil’s killing, including Mia Farrow, Jimmy Kimmel, Jane Goodall, and others.

Ricky Gervais

RIP #CecilTheLion I’m struggling to imagine anything more beautiful than this pic.twitter.com/lile3Kb2dk

— Ricky Gervais (@rickygervais) July 28, 2015

Arnold Schwarzenegger

Protecting big cats is also ballsy. Stop killing them! I’m in. #5forBigCats Join me: https://t.co/1XwSdhVMZx pic.twitter.com/Z5wNu03opt

— Arnold (@Schwarzenegger) July 29, 2015

Freek Vonk

What must have happened in your life that make u want to kill a majestic animal & sit behind it smiling #CecilTheLion pic.twitter.com/OV0kH3EKHS

— Dr. Freek Vonk (@freekvonk) July 29, 2015

Sharon Osbourne

I hope that #WalterPalmer loses his home, his practice & his money. He has already lost his soul…

— Sharon Osbourne (@MrsSOsbourne) July 28, 2015

Ricky Martin

#JusticeForCecilTheLion NOW.

— Ricky Martin (@ricky_martin) July 28, 2015

Lisa Vanderpump

What an excellent example of evil cowardice as Dr Walter Palmer beheads that majestic creature. That title “Dr” should be revoked.

— Lisa Vanderpump (@LisaVanderpump) July 28, 2015

Mia Farrow

Animals are not trophies. Ever. #CecilTheLion

— mia farrow (@MiaFarrow) July 29, 2015

Jimmy Kimmel on the Killing of Cecil the Lion

Calls for trophy hunting ban

The killing of Cecil has renewed calls among activists for a ban on trophy hunting of animals such as lions in Africa.

Johnny Rodrigues, chairman of the Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force (WCTF), told the Star on Wednesday that a moratorium should be placed on trophy hunting in Zimbabwe after Cecil’s killing.

“You have to decide what conservation is,” Chris Mercer with the Campaign Against Canned Hunting told National Geographic. “I would define real conservation as the preservation of natural functioning ecosystems. On ranches where farmers buy animals, put them on their land, bring the hunters on to shoot them, and then go back and buy more — that has nothing to do with conservation.”

Lions are designated as vulnerable on an international “red list” of species facing threats. African lion populations have fallen almost 60% over three decades, and as few as 30,000 of them are left across the whole African continent, living in isolated populations.

Trophy hunters legally kill at least 600 lions per year. Export of lion trophies to the US account for 64% of lions killed.

The US government is currently deciding whether to add lions to its Endangered Species Act, which would ban their import.

Through petitions millions of people are urging governments to take stand against trophy hunters.

Avaaz

US, EU: SAVE AFRICA’S LIONS! 

Care2

DEMAND JUSTICE FOR CECIL THE LION IN ZIMBABWE 

Change.org

JUSTICE FOR CECIL THE ICONIC COLLARED LION SLAUGHTERED BY TROPHY HUNTER IN ZIMBABWE!

Big-game hunters in the crosshairs

The killing of Cecil the Lion has stoked a debate around a growing trend in trophy hunting of endangered species. The question about the legality of Cecil’s hunt has shined a light on the dark side of legal trophy hunting, which is allowed in some African countries like Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa and banned in Botswana and Zambia.

Many people around the world are increasingly voicing their opposition to big game hunting, both illegal and legal.

Conservationists and politicians have called on the EU to ban the import of lion heads, paws and skins as hunters’ trophies from African countries that cannot prove their lion populations are sustainable.

Zimbabwe calls for US lion hunter to face trial

Investigations suggest the killing of Cecil was illegal because the landowner “was not allocated a lion on his hunting quota for 2015,” said a statement from the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority.

Fleeing from the attack, it took more than 40 hours for the hunters to track Cecil and finish him off with a rifle, the Zimbabwe authorities said.

The dentist admits that he paid $50,000 to travel to Hwange National Park in Zimbabwe, and used a dead animal as bait to lure the lion out of the protected area.

Palmer is now in hiding somewhere in the United States, and his exact whereabouts remains unknown.

The US dentist who killed a lion in Zimbabwe should be extradited to face charges, Zimbabwe’s Environment Minister Oppah Muchinguri has said. Walter Palmer’s extradition was being sought so that he could “be held accountable for his illegal action,” she said.

The US Department of Justice declined to comment on the extradition request but confirmed that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was investigating the circumstances of the lion’s death.

Effect on Tourism

“A lot of people travel long distances coming to Zimbabwe to enjoy our wildlife and obviously the absence of Cecil is a disaster,” Emmanuel Fundira, president of the Safari Operators Association of Zimbabwe said on Tuesday.

Zimbabwean government officials stated that the killing of Cecil had already caused a drop in tourism revenues. A significant drop was noted in Hwange National Park, where the lion had lived. 

Many international tourists, who had planned to see the lion, had cancelled their trips. “This killing is a huge loss to our tourism sector that was contributing immensely to the national wealth”, said Emanuel Fundira. 

Head of the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority, Karikoga Kaseke, said that “Tourism was booming, but Zimbabwe was now perceived as a country which was not interested in protecting and promoting animal rights, and this had also had a negative impact on the tourism sector.”

The post Cecil the Lion’s Death and Blood Lions Movie Spark Global Outrage and Debate over Trophy Hunts appeared first on African Conservation Foundation.