Why Namibian Farmers Are Satisfied With the Performance of Their Livestock Guarding Dogs

The success of livestock guarding dogs (LGDs) in mitigating farmer–predator conflict relies on the perceptions of farmers that use them. Purebred LGDs are provided to Namibian farmers by the Cheetah Conservation Fund as a farmer–predator conflict mitigation measure. We examined the perceptions of fa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Human dimensions of wildlife Jg. 18; H. 6; S. 403 - 415
Hauptverfasser: Potgieter, Gail C, Marker, Laurie L, Avenant, Nico L, Kerley, Graham I. H
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Philadelphia Routledge 01.11.2013
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Schlagworte:
Acinonyx jubatus
Age
correlation
Dogs
farmer perceptions
Farmers
farms
human-wildlife conflict
interviews
Livestock
livestock losses
Losses
Namibia
Perceptions
purebreds
wildlife
Namibia
ISSN:1533-158X, 1087-1209, 1533-158X
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The success of livestock guarding dogs (LGDs) in mitigating farmer–predator conflict relies on the perceptions of farmers that use them. Purebred LGDs are provided to Namibian farmers by the Cheetah Conservation Fund as a farmer–predator conflict mitigation measure. We examined the perceptions of farmers using 164 of these LGDs by analyzing data collected during face-to-face interviews from 2000–2010. Although most respondents reported reduced livestock losses since LGD introduction, satisfaction with LGD performance was more strongly linked to their observations of LGD behavior. The most commonly reported negative behaviors were staying home (29 LGDs, 18%) and chasing wildlife (25 LGDs, 15%). On subsistence farms, care provided was negatively correlated with LGD age (r = −.34, n = 35, p = .04) and LGDs reportedly staying home were provided with less care than other LGDs. Overall, LGDs performed satisfactorily on commercial and subsistence farms, and thus contributed to farmer–predator conflict mitigation.
Bibliographie:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2013.803211
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:1533-158X
1087-1209
1533-158X
DOI:10.1080/10871209.2013.803211