Everything about fox hunting


blueridgehunt.com keyword stats



Most current MSN search phrases:

diego sandals
their jack russell prints
hunting fox hounds association

Crop Damages by Wild Animals Global View Country Report and Reviews in 1-10 Sections

Crop Damage by Wild Animalssection iJapan, increased rapidly during
general discussions1990-1998 . This increase appeared to
G.M. Wanihave halted in 1999-2000, probably due
Ph.D ; D.V.M (Germany)to increased hunting and nuisance
FN ISSGAPU, FN DAADcontrol. The period of rapid increase
Director Extension Education / SAMETIwas associated with a disproportionately
Sher-e-Kashmir University ofrapid increase in compensation paid for
Agricultural Sciences and Technology ofdeer damage to crops. We studied changes
Kashmirin diet during 1990-2000, as reflected
Shalimar, Srinagar, 191121by stable isotope ratios of C and N in
Âtooth collagen. We hypothesized that
Âisotope ratios would demonstrate dietary
Âshifts related to population levels and
A brief global review to asses theor time, and that shifts in isotope
damage caused to cultivated crops byratios would be consistent with
wild animals around the world. Theincreasing individual consumption of
review was attempted in response to apasture grasses at higher population
recommendation of ICAR Regionallevels, delta 13C isotope ratios of
Committee No.1 held in Oct, 2007 attooth collagen in 3 year-old sika
Solan, H.p. presided over by Hon'bleindicated a diet dominated by C3 plants
Director General, ICAR Dr. Mangala Raithroughout the period, and that forage
inauguration was chaired by Hon'blespecies other than pasture grasses and
Agriculture Minister J&K, Jenab Ab. Azizdwarf bamboo Sasa nipponica ( the main
Zargar.crop and woodland understory plants,Â
                   Ârespectively) were important elements.
                   ÂThere was a significant decline in the
                   Âdelta 13C isotope ratio duringÂ
   Author1990-2000 in both males and females,
Âdelta 15N values showed no trend with
                   Âtime for males, but increased over time
              Âin females. Indices of population
Â(Sightings per Unit Effort, SPUE) were
Ânegatively correlated with female delta
Â13C, and positively correlated with
Published by:Â Director Statefemale delta 15N, values indicating a
Agricultural Management and Extensionshift in diet over the period ,
Training Institute of Kashmir (SAMETI-K)especially among females. This shift may
, SKUAST-K , Shalimar , Post Box: 461,be related to population and/or offtake
G.P.O, Srinagar.levels, in particular the rapid
Âincrease in female offtake for nuisance
Âcontrol and hunting during the period.
                   ÂThe data are consistent with a relative
Publication No: SAMETI/Pub/3/1000increase in pasture grass consumption
January, 2008per individual at higher population
Âlevels, however, other explanations of
Âthe data are equally plausible. Possible
Âdietary changes, and other factors,
P.O.Box: 461, GPO, Srinagar, E.Mail: Â Âinfluencing the observed shift in
       Phone:     Âisotope ratios are discussed. Although
0194-2461317,0194-2463460,0194-2463459Âstatistically significant, the magnitude
         Cell:       Âof dietary shifts nevertheless
09419095342Â ;appeared small, and did not provide
Residence:0194-2431508,2435741evidence which would justify modifying
Âthe current policy, of limiting crop
Âdamage through managed population
Âreduction to about 25% of peak levels(
Introduction:Halley et al 2006).
ÂÂ
      Wild animal-human conflicts12. White-tailed deer damages
have started since beginning of human         White-tailed deer
era from Adam and Eve. This conflict of(Odocoileus virginianus) may cause more
wilderness made man to hide in caves anddamage than any other species of
he was called as "Cave man". Slowly,wildlife. These damages include crop
with his advancement it is he wholoss, automobile and aviation
invented Axe and other weapon in stonecollisions, disease transmission,
and iron ages to frighten the wildenvironmental degradation, and
animals, initially. Later on he hunteddestruction of ornamental plantings.
them to save himself. This feeling ofOne practical method of controlling deer
uncertainty and fear of wild animals anddamage is the use of exclusionary
wilderness reduced with the invention offences. The relatively high cost of
fire. He made sharp weapons of bones andlabor and materials required to build
iron. These initial weapons were theeffective fences has limited most
beginning of this conflict, Animal humanapplications to the protection of
conflict.orchards, vegetable farms, other high
Thirty thousand years ago, the human-value resources, and mitigation of
population rose to 6 million. They werehuman health and safety risks.
still hunters. With the invention ofImprovements in fence technology
fire, he set fire a vast majority ofresulting in less expensive, yet
sanctuaries, which scared wild life andeffective fence have expanded the use of
they migrated from his neighborhood.fence to manage damage caused by deer.
Many forests, hills and difficultFence typically installed to manage
terrains were still beyond the reach ofwhite-tailed deer damage include wire or
man three thousand years before,plastic mesh, electrified high-tensile
although human population has increasedsteel wire, and electrified polytape or
to 60 million. Man has already startedpolyrope fence. They reviewed the
primitive agriculture. He had made hisscientific literature on fencing to
terrains and wild life scared by himdetermine which fence designs would be
left his close habitats and searched forthe most effective for excluding deer in
fresh abodes. Man by now had lust fora variety of situations (VerCauteren et
fur, horns, ornaments and other forestal 2006).
resources. He invented many means to         The installation of
frighten whole wild life. He became afences to protect agricultural products,
"Danger "not only for wild animals butnatural resources, or other areas from
for his own species, environment anddeer (Odocoileus spp.) can be expensive
eco-biodiversity.and potential benefits of fencing are
Three hundred years ago hedifficult to quantify. A rational method
industrialized crop production andis needed to help evaluate whether
produced enough food, for nearly 600fencing can be cost effective and which
million people. This continued and fromfence designs will be optimal for
30 year now he is feeding 6000 millionparticular applications. They describe
people. Today we have a global foodan interactive, dynamic simulation model
security for 7.5 billion. Human foodthat conducts economic analyses and
security gains resulted in reduction ofpredicts economic benefit associated
all other wild species, thus, the originwith fences for crops relative to area
of wild- life- human conflict is theand perimeter of protected plot, value
lust of man for more food, more luxuryof crop, percentage of crop damaged by
or sometimes fun for hunting or fur.deer annually prior to fencing, efficacy
This reduced wild life reserves and nowof fence, and costs of fence materials
a open conflict came into existence.and labor. Users of the model can easily
Many man-wild life conflicts have beenadjust these variables to fit their
reported from Gir forests of Gujarat,individual situations and needs. By
Rajaji National Park in UP and manyrunning a series of simulations, model
other states where forest lands becameusers can answer questions related
cultivable lands. Elephants, wild boars,directly to fence efficacy and
monkeys, squirrels, deer , birds likecost-effectiveness (VerCauteren K et al
crows, parakeets, wild dogs, jackals,2006).
gaur, sambur, langure, fowls, pea cocks,Â
neilgai, Hippos, biats, blackbirds,13. Corn damage by wild life
rodents, wild pigs, feral species,         Corn damages in USA
primates, beetles, foxes, pigeons, feralwere estimated at 6.6 per hac due to
hogs and a variety of other specieswild life. The white tailed deer was the
damage crops. The carnivores even attackwild animal responsible for loss. The
human too. These attacks are for searchaverage hacters owned by farmers were
of food or their loss of habitat. Many125 out of which 55 hectares were sown
such accidents came to be known in Jammucorn. (Tzilkowsi et al 2002).
and Kashmir. The bear leopod and otherÂ
wild animals are reducing in number.14. Â Deer Damage
Their habitats used by human.         Deer (Odocoileus
The human causalities are due tospp.) can cause substantial damage to
carnivorous species, but herbivoresagricultural crops, resulting in
inflict economic and human losses too.economic losses for producers. They
The crop damages by wild life has beendeveloped a deer activated bio-acoustic
the new threat to agriculturalfrightening device to reduce
productivity throughout the world. Thiswhite-tailed deer (O, virginianus)
also concerns us in Asia and India. Thisdamage in agricultural fields. The
review is aimed to find out:device considered of an infrared
1.      Extent of damage todetection system that activated an audio
crops.component which broadcast recorded
2.      Nature of crop damagedistress and alarm calls of deer. They
3.      Ways and means to preventtested the device against unprotected
these losses.controls in cornfields during the
4.      A strategic planning tosilking-tasseling stage of growth in
drive a line between wildlifeJuly 2001. The device was not effective
conservation and farm economicsin reducing damage: track-count indices
especially in India.(F1,4=0.02), corn yield
Â(F1,9=1.27,P=0.289), and estimated
Executive Abstracts and Strategicdamage levels (F1,10=0.87, P=0.374) did
elementaries: [EASE]not differ between experimental and
1.    Importancecontrol fields. The size
                 Â(F2,26=1,00,P=0.380), location
Species causing crop damages ranges from(F2,25=0.39,P=0.684), and percent
elephant's wild birds, monkeys,overlap (F2,25=0.20,P=0.818) of
squirrels, deer, parakeet, wild dogs,use-areas of radiomarked female deer did
foxes, deer and many others likenot differ between during and after
Neilgai. On an average this damage totreatment periods. They concluded that
crops by wild animals amounts to U$ 961the deer-activated bio-acoustic device
per hectare. It is much more than anwas not effective in protecting
Indian Farmer earns from a hactercornfields in this study; however, the
annually. Therefore, by these estimates,device may be more effective in small
the damages are spectacular andareas such as gardens or for high value
economically important.crops that do not grow tall enough to
2.      Human Elephant conflictsoffer protective cover (Gilsdorf et al
(HEC):2004).
         i) Economic Losses:         White -tailed deer
                 Â(Odocoileus virginianus) cause millions
Among elephants crop raiding is common.of dollars of damage to agricultural
The crops near their home ranges arecrops annually . They tested the
damaged more. Elephants damaging cropseffectiveness of propane exploders and
had twice big ranges than those who didElectronic Guards (Pocatello Supply
not damage the crops. Thus, moreDepot, Pocatello, Id). For reducing deer
proximity of the crops near their rangesdamage in corn fields during the
are prone to crops damages. Trainsilking-tasseling stage of growth.
accidents instigate elephants more toTrack-count indices (F2,7=0.70,P=0.532),
crop or human damages. Indonesia sawcorn yield (F2,6=0.14, P=0.873), and
more frequent raids of elephants onestimated damage levels (F2, 12=1,45
crops. Human elephant conflict (HEC) isP=0.272) did not differ between
frequent and poses serious challenges inexperimental and control fields. The
Africa. Both male groups and familysize (F2,11=0.08,P =0.924), LocationÂ
group attacks have been observed. HEC(F2,9=0.30, P=0.750), and percent
losses in West Bengal were worth 3.2overlap (F2,9=0.46, P=0.644) of use
croses of Rupees. This damage occurred-areas of radiomarked female deer in the
in 3368sq kms.radius. The numericalvicinity of experimental fields did not
number of elephants was 62 only. Assamdiffer among before, during and after
observes damages to the woodcutters by18 day treatment periods. In a related
elephants Asian wild Elephants raid andstudy, we placed propane exploders in
damage crops in herds of 10-13cornfields within use-areas of 12
individuals or big herds comprisingradiomarked female deer. The deer did
50-74 elephants. In Darjeeling districtnot react appreciably to the devices;
alone over an area of 200 kms. East tothe size (F2, 17=0.08, P=0.921),
west, in last two decades 277 houseslocation (F2,22=1.37, P=0.275), and
were demolished by elephants, killing 66percent overlap (f2,10=0.47, P=0.636) of
people in 5 districts. As a result ofdeer use areas did not differ among
this conflict 23 elephants lost theirbefore, during, and after 14 day
lives. In 2001, economic loss of thetreatment periods. They conclude that
order of US fifty thousand dollars waspropane exploders and Electronic Guards
estimated to be inflicted by elephants.have limited potential for reducing deer
This scenario necessitates comprehensivedamage to corn at the silking-tasseling
measures to be taken to lessen thesestage (Glisdorf et al 2004l.
damage. The review of the measures,Â
around the world suggest following few         A welfare measure for
studies to be undertaken and resultantwildlife damage to Ontario (Canada)
measures to be applied to lessen thesefield crop producers during the 1998
damages.ii)Â Â Â Â Mitigation ofwas. The welfare measure presented in
losses:this study provides a more accurate
         Methods developed andpicture of losses from wildlife damage
used to mitigate crop damages byto agricultural. Other damage estimates
elephants consisted of frightening ofbased on yield loss overstate the damage
animals by drum beating, firegracks orsince benefits from wildlife are netted
even air gun fires. Guarding the cropsout. Results for the Ontario field crop
by fences or even using electric fencingproducers indicate that the magnitude of
or raising poles and wiring may bethe difference between the value of the
effective. Chemical based deterrents,yield loss and the welfare measure of
and electric fencing have been found todamage is approximately 50%. This
reduce crop damages. High voltagedifference indicates that most farmers
electric fencing using energizers inwere willing to tolerate the wildlife
west have prevented wild animalsdamage they experienced (Heigh et al
damaging crop but this preposition may2001).
not be applicable in areas where evenÂ
habitations do not have access to15. Grapevine damages
electricity. However, this method may         In field trials in
act as a temporary boundary separating1999-2000 in Gundla Pochampally, Andhra
wild and domestic habitats. This couldPradesh, India , the incidence of damage
prevent intrusions from sly vatic toto green grapevines was studied. Visits
domestic foci. Guarding fields, diggingto the vines by bats begain around 45
trenches, modifying cropping patternsminutes after sunset and foraging
have a possibility of reducing mancontinued until 1 hour before sunrise.
elephant conflicts or Human elephantDamage occurred to ripe fruit only, and
conflicts. A 30% open space between twoincreased around harvesting time,
habitats may help to avoid HEC. Thispercentage damage ranged from 0 to 100%
means a distance to be maintained(Bhargavi et al, 2001).
between cropping fields and elephantÂ
habitates. A proper investigation on16. Â Â Hippo damage
these lines is needed. A grid based         The introduction to
geographical information system (GIS)the paper described the various
with a 25Km2 resolution may help to haveecological effects known to result from
cost effective data source to analyzegrazing, movement along paths, and
these situations. There is urgent needwallowing by the common hippo.
of identifying spatial predictors ofHippopotamus amphibious. The study
HEC. On the basis of this study one canreported was carried out at Kainji Lake
suggest or plan mitigation strategies,National Park., Nigeria, during  the
early warnings of attacks, use ofdry season periods {of 1991 and 1992} .
barriers and deterrents. The utility ofThe method adopted by Agnew, A.D.Q.
the methods could be assessed for land(East African Wildlife Journal (1966) 4,
use and livelihood strategies to limit38-46) was used to assess hippo foraging
HEC.footprints at three hippo pool sites. A
Âtotal of 32 footpaths were enumerated
3.      Dear-Nilgai Damages.out of which 18 were located at Kaii
         A survey of 2500hippo pool site, while the frequency of
farms in UK revealed that 69% (n=192)utilization of paths was also higher for
cereal crops were damaged by deer. Thisthis site relative to those in other
damage costed £500 per annum per farm.area. The upstream-downstream trend in
Damages varied with deer density. In USAhippo occupancy of dry  season water
too deer damages comprised of crop loss,pools could expose the hippo to crop
landscape damages, car accidents anddamage conflicts at the peripheral
property damages. Nilgai damagesareas.
alongwith deer damages are common inÂ
India too. Tree cover of Acacia in the17. Hygo-Japan-mammal crop damages
area is generally used as shelter byÂ
Nilgai. We have encountered huge crop         Mammals inhabiting Â
damage in Mathura (CIRG) and nearby areaHyogo consist of seven orders, 17
by Nilgai visits. Grazing and browsingfamilies and about 40 species. Except
of Nilgai inflict losses on farms. Thisfor Lagomorpha and Artiodactyla, the
is regarded as a mammalian crop threatremaining five orders among them include
by the farmers. This behaviour of theirspecies which need some protection and
inflict ozone injury to the youngthey total about 55% of all species
sapling, so precious for the growth ofexcluding extinct, introduced and feral
trees in Indian semi-arid farms.species. Ecological information in Hyogo
Âprefecture has been accumulated in few
         Corn damages by deerprotection-required species there is no
in USA amounts to 6.6.% per hectare. Inrecent information of spatial
an area where a farmer owned 125 hectaredistribution on Oriental water-shrew,
on an average 55 hectares were used toJapanese noctule-bat and Japanese
sow corn. There is a 6.6% loss of thedormouse; and little information on
product which is a huge economic loss.Japanese shrew, Japanese horse-shoe bat,
Similar damages by deer in Ontario,Japanese large -footed bat. Schreiber's
Canada, Portugal, Japan, South Americabent-winged bat, Japanese tube-nosed
and other parts of the world have beenbat, common parti-colored bat, Japanese
reviewed. In Virginia too a studysquirrel, Japanese small
involving 1506 agricultural producerflying-squirrel, Japanese giant
farmers revealed 58% of themflying-squirrel, smith's vole harvest
experiencing deer damages. Ways andmouse and Japanese badger. Damage and
means to prevent such attacks on cropspopulation managements is also necessary
have been reviewed. Most of the possiblein sika deer and Japanese wild boar, to
measures to be adopted are similar toreduce their crop--damaging, and
these described for elephants (HEC).comprehensive management in Japanese
Âblack bear, an endangered local
4.   Other Mammal and bird damagespopulation, to prevent human-bear fatal
Âaccident. Habitat alteration due to
         Monkey damages maize,human activities, however, has affected
sweet potato and other crops. It isthe population sizes and spatial
suggested to reduce or change croppingdistribution of all these, mammals in
pattern or alternating withHyogo. Habitat management has priority
non-agricultural activities nearover damage. Fundamental and applied
location of monkey habitats. Variousscientific studies and understanding of
methods are reviewed. Bat damage, Hygoecology and wildlife management science
crop damages in Japan, Grape wineneeds promotion by citizens (Mitani M
damages by bats in Andra Pradesh, India2000).
have been studied. Crop economic lossÂ
assessment has been reviewed in these18. Monkey damage
pages. Clover rather than grass canÂ
reduce wild mammal damages. Alley         Forty-seven property
cropping of black walnuts helped to saveowners in Entebbe, Uganda were
soyabean and maize crop damages.questioned about vervet monkey
Pesticide damages wildlife and minimizeactivities on their property. The
their attacks, enclosures and otherobjective was to investigate the
electric fencing help to avoid suchinteractions between humans and vervet
damage. Can one use harmful means tomonkeys in an agricultural area adjacent
save crops, need a suitable strategy toto a forest zone. Other studies have
preserve ecology and biodiversity. Bothreported that farms located within 300 m
crops and wild animals need security andof a forested boundary probably incur
conservation. A management strategy isthe greatest risk of crop-raiding. Two
needed to safeguard human and wildlifeother factors that may influence
equally. Â A policy framework issusceptibility to vervet crop-raiding
envisaged.were also examined: the types of crops
Âgrown and the types of direct preventive
         Blackbird crop damagemeasures used. The effect of these two
in USA amounts to 5-8 million dollars. Afactors on vervet crop-raiding is not
considerable sum of crores of rupeesstraight forward. However, the distance
have been estimated to be damages in thea property is located from the forest
form of crop, human and property lossesedge is an important factor influencing
by wild animals, birds and other rodentsvervet crop raiding. Surveyed  gardens
in India. Many measures to reduce these200 m from the forest edge received
losses are needed and have beensignificantly less crop -raiding than
reviewed.farms located 100 or 50m (P=0.040,<
Âalpha=0.05). In this study, 8 out of 13
Âfarmers (61.5%) said that maize, sweet
Âpotato, or both, were most likely to be
Âdamaged by the vervets. Other crops
Âsingled out by the farmers are receiving
Reviewdamage by the vervets were bananas,
1. Wild animals damaging cropsmangoes, groundnuts and yam. They
To elephants wild boar, porcupine, rheussuggest that the development of
macaque (Macaca mulatta), hoary-belliednon-agricultural activities on land
squirrel, barking deer (Muntiacusdirectly adjacent to forested areas may
muntjak), red-breasted parakeetreduce vervet crop -raiding by deterring
(Psittacula alexandri), and wild dog arevervets from traveling greater distances
wild animals damaging crops.from the forest edge due to increased
Methods developed and being used toobstacles or risks  (Saj et al 2001).
mitigate man-wildlife conflict include,Â
frightening the animals; guarding the19. Bait damage
crops; and using some sort of scarecrow         The longevity of zinc
and traps (Miah et al 2001).phosphide (ZP) on whole wheat bait  was
Accurate estimation of crop damage bydetermined at the end of the "dry" and
wildlife (raccoons, white-tailed deer,"wet" seasons, Â is Western Australia..
and coyotes) often requiresWhile the total rainfall during the two
labour-intensive sampling procedure.trials was 74 mm and 155mm, substantial
Variable area transect (VAT) samplingloss of ZP was recorded only after
has been identified as a potentialsignificant rainfall events.
labour-saving alternative to quadratIrrespective of season, the loss of ZP
sampling ( Engerman et al 2002).from bait applied in bait stations was
Âminimal. The maximum recorded loss was
2. Wild life Human conflicts17% and this occurred after 21 days'
Agricultural landowners suffer in theexposure during the wet season where the
form of damage to crops, livestock, andbait stations were placed in-crop.
other property. Some wildlife agenciesNevertheless, regardless of the
maintained abatement and compensationapplication method, sufficient ZP always
programmes. A model of deer-inflictedremained on the wheat bait.
crop damage used to facilitate agencyTheoretically  it was lethal to rats
decisions regarding deer densities andfor at least 8-14 days (Twigg et al., Â
distribution, abatement use, and to2001).
forecast compensation. The model is20.Venezuela experience:
applied to field-level compensation         In Venezuela, lethal
claims in Wisconsin, USA. The resultscontrol of wintering Dickcissels (Spiza
are consistent with theory, ( Yoder J,Americana) is considered a threat to the
2002).species survival. To help farmers
Âprotect their rice and sorghum crops
3. Crop Economic loss due to wild lifefrom by Dickcissels and to minimize the
         People's perceptionskilling of large numbers of these birds,
were discerned through participatoryalternative non-lethal crop protection
discussions covering 419 householdsmeasures are needed. To that end, the
distributed in 10 villages in the bufferresponses of captive Dickcissels to
zone. Traditional uncodified rights ofthree bird-repellent chemicals
local people were substantially reduced(anthraquinone,methyl anthranilate and
through policy interventions set inmethiocarb) applied to rice seed were
since 1860s. Local people as well asevaluated. In one-cup feeding trials,
tourists have been excluded from thetreatments of methiocarb (0.05% g/g,
core zone covering an area of 625 km2applied as Mesurol 75%Â wettable
since 1982. Deterioration of ruralpowder) and anthraquinone (0.5%, applied
economy due to damage to crop andas Flight Control) reduced consumption
livestock by wildlife and, terminationof rice by 70% relative to pretreatment
of opportunities of income from wildconsumption. Other anthraquinone
medicinal plant resources and tourism intreatments (0.05,0.1%) and methyl
the core zone were the key negativeauthranilate (0.05%) were inrffective.
impacts of conservation policy felt byIn two -cup trials, with untreated
more than 90% of respondents. Meanmillet as the alternative food,
annual economic loss per household wasconsumption of rice treated with 0.05
estimated as Rs.1285, Rs. 1195 andand 0.1%Â anthraquinone was reduced by
Rs.156 due to damage caused by wildlife90% relative to pretreatment levels.
to food crops, fruit trees and beehives,Overall, Dickcissels responded to the
respectively, Rs. 1587Â due to ban onrepellents similarly to the red-winged
collection of wild medicinal plants forblackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). Because
marketing and Rs.7904 due to ban onFlight Control has been used
tourism in the core zone. The Reservesuccessfully to reduce blackbird use of
authority granted compensation forrice fields in the USA, the prospect is
livestock killed by wildlife but it wasgood for successful reduction of damage
hardly 5% of the market value of killedto repening rice by Dickcissels in
livestock as assessed by the people.Venezuela, particularly if repellent use
People did not appreciate much theis coupled with the establishment of
present benefits from the reservealternative feeding sites ( Avery et al
management in the form of wages for2001). Deer selected carrots over all
carrying out afforestation work, partialgreen manure crops.
compensation for livestock depredationÂ
and availability of solar power devices,21. Nilgai damages in India
wool, and spinning devices.          Crop-damage by
Approximately 95% respondents identifiednilgai has been widely reported from
empowerment of local people in respectIndia. Â Are give Nilgai is for
of realizing income from timber fromincreasing in this region. Lack of
dead/diseased trees in communitynatural predators, deforestation
forests, income from medicinal plants inovergrazing and the protection of these
buffer zone and opening of the core zoneanimals from Hindu communities are
for tourism as potential developmentreasons for their overpopulation. Tree
options. Improvement in rural economy,cover of Acacia are generally used by
the prime concern of local people, hasnilgai as a day time shelter but not
not received as much attention as legalfood, Â therefore it goes for
enforcement of protection by the reservecrop-raiding in the late evening and at
management. There is a need fornight, jumping across 6-7 feet high
developing policies and managementstone wall, barbed fencing and fences of
actions that serve the economicdead or live thorny plant material and
interests of local people together withany other fencing/barrier made to
enhancement of environment conservationprotect the crop-. Due to habit of both
goal (Maikhuri et al 2001).grazing as well as browsing they devore
Âevery kind of farm species (both rabi
4. Crop selection:and kharif crops). It has been observed
Damage was less (34%) in experimentalthat eating less but destroying more by
carrot as multiple crop than carrotstrampling and causing damage are
as only crop planted (62% damage).therefore regarded as serious mammalian
Staggered plantings of canola, whichcrop pest and farmers wants to get ride
continuously produced flowers, was theof this unconventional pest. The farmers
most effective lure crop of the greenchase them away by just following them
manure crops we tested. Carrot producersby making loud sound by crackers or air
should use electric fences or 2.4-mgun fires, following through tractors,
woven wire fences, perhaps combined withempty tin or dried pumpkin filled with
staggered canola plantings, to reducesmall stones and connected with strings.
carrot depredations ( Schwab et alTechnically, carrots(enclosures),
2001).trenching or power fencing are suggested
         The colver, ratherto mitigate the crop damage. Secondly,
than fertilized grass, is more effectiveanimals could be translocated to
cover crop on AFAs, against damage bywildlife sanctuaries from the sites they
migratory geese. The sward should beseen overcrowded or severe crop raiding
managed to encourage clover growth,problems (Goyal et al 2000).
which would probably involve frequentÂ
cutting but no fertilizer. Further22. Pesticides and wildlife
research is needed on cloverA range of monitoring activities has
replenishment rate over the wintershown impacts of anticholinesterase
season and possible benefits of cloverpesticides on UK wildlife, and continued
leys to other wild life (McKay et alrisks are evident from laboratory and
2001). Alley cropping of black walnutsfield experiments, together with the
and percent with maize and soyabeanscale of use in the field. Along with
rotations may avoid will animal damages.other broad spectrum insecticides, many
Tree -crop ratio of 1:10 may help(organophosphates have adverse direct
Godsey, 2000).effects on non-target arthropods in
Âfarmland, and so are likely to
5. Elephan- human conflicts:contribute towards indirect effects of
Conflicts between elephants (Elephaspesticides on farmland biodiversity. The
maximus) and human occur in Rajajianticholinesterase insecticides have
National Park (RNP), Uttar Pradesh, oneboth lethal and sublethal effects on
of eleven reserves designated in India,aquatic wildlife, however the history of
to conserve Asian elephants.recent incidents of damage to river
Elephant-human. The conflicts in RNPecology following the wider use of
from 1996 to 1999 were studied, and allsynthetic pyrethroid sheep dips,
human and elephant deaths or injuriesillustrates the need to consider the
caused by conflict were recorded. Theimplications of changes in the use of
impact of human colonies on elephantalternative products when reviewing
movement was studied in 18 villagesthese insecticides ( Burn 2000).
along 17 km of the sourthern boundary ofÂ
the study site and 4 village in the         The use of
Chilla-Motichur corridor. Three male andanthraguinone-based flight control and
four female elephants were radio trackedmethyl anthranilate-based non toxic
for 1-2 years. Primary conflictsavian foraging repellent we used to
included crop raiding, competitionavoid crop damage by sandhill cranes.
between humans and elephants forThought both repellents were effective
vegetation, and elephant mortality dueat deterring cranes from treated corn,
to train accidents. Adult males thatneither has been tested on corn under
raided crops had home ranges twice asfield conditions. (Blackwell et al
large as adult males that did not raid2001).
crops. Elephants only damaged crop of         Oak seedlings were
fields that occurred within their homescientifically raised. Seedling
ranges. Field trails of chemical basedmortality and wild life browse damages
deterrents and electric fencing shouldwere minimal when certain herbicide
be tried to reduce crop damage. Trainmixture was used. Biologically and
speeds need to be reduced to preventaesthetically, the procedure was
accidental elephant mortality (Williamsextremely successful (Ezell et al 1999).
et al 2001).         Pre-commercially
Âthinned (forests are less prone to moose
Wild Elephant damages:damage (McLaren et al, 2000).
         A rapid village andÂ
field assessments, data survey showed.23. Pesticide use in conflicts
Elephants raided crops at a rate of 0.53Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Pesticides can cause
elephants per day in Indonesia. Thedamage to man and beneficial organism.
frequency of crop raiding was related toSome sub-lethal effects of pesticides
vegetation type along the park border,were studied in birds with a view to
the size and presence of rivers, and theidentifying characteristic biochemical
distance to the park's Elephant Trainingresponses that may be useful for the
Centre (ETC), which houses about 150monitoring of exposure to sub-lethal
captive elephants. Wild elephantslevels in the field. Pesticides were
damaged at least 450000Â m2 of maize,used; demeton-S-methyl,
rice, cassava, beans and other annual(DSM),chlorpyriphos, chlorfenviphos,
crops, and close to 900 coconut, bananatriazophos, pirimicarb, methiocarb and
and other perennial trees in the areapermethrin. Blood was collected before
surveyed. Elephants killed or injured 24dosing, and 2,6,24,48 and 72 hours after
.Villagers try to reduce elephant damagethe treatment from the brachial vein of
by guarding fields, digging trenchesbirds. Enzyme, activities were assayed
between the park and their fields, andin the plasma or serum samples obtained.
modifying their cropping patterns.The assays used were GOT,MHD, GDH,
Elephants-human conflict decreases theSDH,GAMMA GT and ChE. The results showed
probability of support from local peoplean increase in plasma and serum GOT and
for conservation efforts. The approachesgamma-GT levels were found in all
are suggested consist of elephantanimals treated with the previous
trenches, electric fences, externalpesticides. The level of ChE increased
support to affected villages, andin birds after treatment with
compensation to villagers for any damagepermethrin. It was concluded that the
caused (Nyhus et al 2000).pesticides cause structural and
         This study exploresfunctional changes in the liver and
land use conflict in south east Kajiadoalso, the measurement of the previous
District, Kenya. The results ofparameter activities may be useful for
household surveys conducted with farmersassessing exposure and sub-lethal
and herders in 1977 and 1996 to examineeffects of pesticides on the wildlife
changes in land management strategies(Dahamna et al 2004).
are compared. The conflict reflectsÂ
ongoing competition over access toÂ
scarce land and water resources between24. IPM and crop losses
herding, farming and wildlife are the         The queensland sugar,
reason of damage of crops. Thisindustry has recently implemented a
man-animal conflict needs understandingcomprehensive integrated pest management
the conditions that have created the(IPM) system to minimize crop losses
present conflicts (Compbell et al 2000).from two antive rodent species, Rattus
It is, therefore, suggested that 30%sordidus (canefield rat) and Melomy
open space be used as a basic divisionburtoni (climbing rat). These species
for stratifying thickets into low -useinflicted approximately $25M of damage
and high-use categories for deer densityin a major outbreak in the 1999-2000
estimation. The proportions of each typeseasons. Both of these rodents are
could be derived from grid-squarelisted as common wildlife under the
measurements of aerial photographsschedules of the queensland nature
(Latham J 2000).Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 1994.
ÂThe IPM programme is based on
Âunderstanding the ecology and biology of
Human elephant conflicteach species. It incorporates a
         Human-elephantlarge-scale monitoring programme aimed
conflict (HEC) in Africa occurs whereverat providing early warning of imminent
these two species coincide, and posesrodent build up to avert major
serious challenges to wild lifeoutbreaks. The industry has alsoÂ
managers, local communities anddeveloped a memorandum of understanding
elephants alike. Mitigation requires awith Queensland State Government, which
details understanding of underlyingdelivers on the industry's pest
patterns and processes. Althoughmanagement needs, while providing an
temporal patterns of HEC are relativelyimproved system of accountability for
predictable, spatial variation has shownthe taking of two of Queenslands native
few universal trends, making itwildlife species. The consensus reached
difficult to predict where conflict willbetween the cooperating parties (The
take place. Crop raiding was furtherBureau of sugar Experiment Stations,
subdivided into incidents involving onlyCANEGROWERS, regionally-based Cane
male elephants or family groups. AProductivity Services, and the outcomes
relatively fine-resolution, systematic,can be negotiated between rural industry
grid -based method was used to assignand environmental interests (Hunt et al
the locations of conflict incidents, and2004)Â .
spatial relations with underlying         In Areas around Lake
variables were explored usingMburo National Park ,large wild animals
correlation analysis and logisticwander in close proximity to human
regression. Crop raiding was clusteredsettlement . This poses serious conflict
into distinct conflict zones. Bothin terms of crop damage. The integration
occurrence and intensity could beof conservation with other land uses is
predicted on the basis of the area underdifficult where densely settled
cultivation and, for male elephantagricultural land surrounds a protected
groups, proximity to major settlement.area potentially containing problem
Conversely, incidents human injury andanimals, as is the case for several
death were less predictable but wereparks in Africa and Asia. The intensity
correlated with proximity to roads. Aof crop raiding was quantified through
grid-based geographical informationthe use of random crop quadrants/plots
system (GIS) with a 25km2 resolutionand area estimation techniques in a
utilizing cost-effective data source,portion of raided fields. The animal
combined with simple statisticalÂspecies concerned were documented from
tools, was capable of identifyingobservations, footprints and any other
spatial predictors of HEC, At finermarks left behind. Three variables were
resolutions spatial autocorrelationtested as predictors of damage; human
compromised the analyses. Synthesis andpopulation density, distance from the
application. These results suggest thatpark boundary and season. In this study
spatial correlates of HEC can bedata is presented regarding crop loss in
identified, regardless of the sex of thethe different seasons of the year,
elephants involved. Moreover, the methodanalysis of crop damage variation and
described here is fully transferable toanimal species involved in crop loss. A
other sites for comparative analysis ofdiverse assemblage of animals foraged on
HEC. Using these results to mapsubsistence crops and analysis of crop
vulnerability will enable thedamage revealed significant crop
development and deployment ofdepreciation by wildlife( Kagoro et al
appropriate conflict mitigation2004).
strategies, such as guarding, earlyÂ
warning systems, barriers andÂ
deterrents. The utility of such methodsÂ
and their strategic deployment should be25. Hawai Pest
assessed alongside alternative land-use         The apple snail,
and livelihood strategies that limitP.canaliculata, is an aquatic freshwater
cultivation within the elephant rangesnail native to South America,
(Sitati et al 2003).Originally imported to Hawai'i as pets
         Human elephantfor the aquarium trade, they were soon
conflicts (HEC) in west Bengal was anintroduced into wetland plots known as
economic loss worth 3.2 crores. This"lo's" where taro (Colocasia esculenta),
much damage occurred in 3368 sq kman economically and culturally
radius inhibiting 62 elephants (Singh etsignificant crop, is grown. Some
al 2002)individuals reasoned that the snails,
Âbeing edible, could be harvested as
6. Â Â Kerala Surveyfood, and that raising the snails along
Crop damage by wild animals in Kerala,with the taro in the "Io's" would
India, was studied from 1993 to 1996.provide income supplemental to the taro
Data were collected from the offices ofharvest with minimum additional input.
the Kerala Forest Department, fieldThis introduction of snails into the
survey and from the intensive study areataro "lo'i" however, proved to be a
at Marayur, Idukki District. Forty-fivedisaster. Farmers failed to take into
species of crops were destroyed by wildaccount the voracity , reproductive
animals in Kerala, the species commonlypotential, and rapid growth of the
destroyed by wild animals were paddy,snails. Because of the ideal conditions
coconut plam , plantains , cassava ,in the taro "lo'i", the snailsÂ
arecanut, coffee, oil plam , pepper ,multiplied rapidly and fed heavily on
jack tree, mulberry and manago. The mainthe taro shoots and corns in many cases,
animals involved in crop damage weredestroying a complete crop before
elephant (Elephas maximus), gaur (Bosharvest time. Hindisight has shown that
gaurus),sambar (Cervus unicolor), wildthe snails are dissipated via the
boar (Sus scrofa), bonnet macaqueirrigation system throughout the "lo'i"
(Macaca radiate), common langurand then spread to the surrounding
(Presbytis entellus), blacknaped harewetland areas. Large breeding
(Lepus nigricollis) and pea fowl (Pavopopulations are now established in
cristatus). Among these, elephants andÂwetland areas on the islands of Hawai'e,
wild board gave maximum damage . Of theO'ahu, Kaua'I, and Maui. Some of these
total compensation claimed by thewetlands are wildlife preserves with
farmers, only 8.2% was sanctioned by thestate and federal mandates that restrict
Kerala Forest Department. The highestthe potential methods of eradication.
crop damage (30%) was recorded from theBackground information is provided on
forest ranges coming under the Northernboth P.canaliculata and taro to fully
Circle: pinapple (47%) , sweet potatoexplain the challenges and opportunities
(47%), tapioca (42%), alocasia (39%) ,that this situation presents (Tamaru et
beans (25%) and plantains (23%) recordedal 2006).
highest percentage of damage. In theÂ
intensive study area at Marayur, 2826. Chemical repellents
species of crops were damaged and         Chemical feeding
highest damage was during the summerrepellents applied to ripening sunflower
months. At maximum damage was due tomight help reduce blackbird (lcteridae)
elephant (72%) followed by gaur (62%) ,damage, which is a chronic agricultural
sambar (17%) and wild boar (16%) . Tigerproblems from seed information harvest.
(Panthera tigris), panther (leopard)However, cost are high to develop and
(Panthera pardus) and wild dog (Conineregister new repellents for agricultural
alpinus) were the main cattle lifters inuse. In 2003 and 2004, we evaluated
the state. A total of 31 deaths and 64feeding repellency of 8 pesticides
injuries caused by wild animals wereregistered by the Environmental
recorded from the state during theProtection Agency for use in sunflower.
period 1983 to 1993. Thirteen indigenousCaged red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius
methods used for controlling the cropphoeniceus) were fed unshelled sunflower
damage had been identified. High voltageseeds treated with the following
electric fencing using energizer waspesticides: 5 pyrethroid insecticides,
effective for stopping elephants andan organochlorine, an organophosphorus,
other herbivores from entering theand a gungicide. Compared to untreated
agriculture fields. Crop damage is foundrefernce groups, feeding rates were
to be linked to the cropping pattern andreduced for 4 of the 5 pyrethroid
location of the agriculture fields.insecticides. Only the organophosphorus
Short term and long-term measures needed(chlorpyrifos), however, significantly
to prevent the crop damage are discusseddecreased feeding rates. More research
(Jayson EA,1999).on repellency effects of this product in
Âfield efficacy trials is probably
7. Â Bird crop damageswarranted based on the results of our
Âcage experiments. Depending on timing of
Use of non-lethal method to avoid cropapplication, registered insecticides
damages by bird have been reported.with blackbird feeding repellency could
Blueberry damages by cedar waxwingsprovide supplemental economic benefits
(Bombycilla cedrotun were minimized.to sunflower producers through dual
(Avery et al 2002).purpose use ((Linz et al 2006).
ÂÂ
8. Wild Bird damage27. Persistent organic pollutants (POPS)
ÂÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Persistent organic
         In the northern Greatpollutants (POPs) have spread throughout
Plains of USA, conflicts betweenthe global environment to threaten human
red-winged black birds (Agelaiushealth and damage ecosystems, with
phoeniceus) and sunflower (Helianthusevidence of POPs contamination in
annus)Â growers have intensified sincewildlife, human blood, and breast milk
the late 1960s due to the expandedÂdocumented worldwide. Based on data from
commercial production of sunflowers. Wethe US Food and Drug Administration,
studied the potential population effectsthis article provides a brief overview
of the removal of up to 2 millionof POPs residues in common foods in the
red-winged blackbirds annually under a 5USA food supply. The analysis focuses on
year programme of baiting during spring12 chemical compounds now targeted for
with DRC-1339 (3-choloro-4an international phase out under the
methalalanine) treated rice. They alsoStockholm convention on POPs. The
examined whether lethal control, inavailable information indicates that
combination with current levels ofPOPs residues are present in virtually
breeding habitat management, would beall categories of foods, including baked
cost effective in decreasing depredationgoods, fruit, vegetables, meat, poultry,
of sunflower crops during late summer.and dairy products. Residues of five or
They evaluated the cost benefit rationmore persistent toxic chemicals in a
for 4 culling scenarios involving (1)single food item are not unusual, with
variable annual cullus, not exceeding 2the most commonly found POPs being the
million birds, with and without densitypesticides DDT ( and its metabolites,
compensation (i.e. ,a positivesuch as DDE) and dieldrin. Estimated
density-dependent response) on adultdaily doses of dieldrin alone exceed the
survival and (2) culls of 2 millionUS Environmental Protection Agency and
birds annually with and without densityUS Agency for Toxic Substances Disease
compensation .We constructed a redControl reference dose for children.
-winged blackbird population modelÂGiven the widespread occurrence of POPs
represented as an age-based matrix andin the food supply and the serious
calibrated to stable growth. We assumedhealth risks associated with even
a total population of 27 million birdsextremely small levels of exposure,
on 1 April (week 1), representing theprevention of further food contamination
red-winged blackbird breeding populationmust be a national health policy
staging in eastern Southern Dakota andpriority in every country.
migrating into North Dakota.Under eachImplementation of the Stockholm
culling scenario, we reduced the stableConvention will prevent further
red-winged blackbird population (Equallyaccumulation of persistent toxic
for females and males) and project thechemicals in food. Early ratification
population through week 23 of the annualand rapid implementation of this treaty
cycle (2 Sep). We then evaluated theshould be an urgent priority for all
associated costs of the managementgovernments (Schafer et al 2002).
relative to potential sunflower cropÂ
losses, assuming $0.07 in damage per28. Netherland experiences
bird and 4% loss to other factors.         Traditionally,
Variable annual culls, likely the morepink-footed geese Anser Brachyrhynchus
biologically realistic model scenarios,wintering in Denmark, the Netherlands
yielded mean annual removals of 1 240and Belgium have used the Danish sites
560 (SE=12 328) birds with densityonly during mild winter, rapidly moving
compensation and 1 231 620 (SE=28 811)southwards in case of cold spells. Since
birds without density compensation,,the 1980s, an increasing number of geese
with cost benefit ratios of 1:2.3 andhave remained on the Danish wintering
1:3.6, respectively. Annual intrinsicgrounds despite cold spells, foraging on
rates for the model population overÂpastures Because winter wheat
the 5 year period ranged from 1-4 torepresented a reliable and profitable
4.8%. Considering potential variabilityfood source even in sever winter, the
in the effectiveness of the cull andÂrecent change in Agricultural practice
the combination of direct and indirecthas enhanced the development of a new
costs,we contend that the realizedwintering strategy of pink-footed geese,
benefits to sunflower growers by lethalallowing a northward expansion of their
control of red-winged blackbiards viawinter range. Potentially, this will
spring baiting , in combination withincrease the crop damage conflict and
current nonlethal management efforts,may lead to further population growth (
would likely be negligible (Blackwell etTherkidsen et al 2000).
al 2003).         Enclosure trials near
         The efficacy ofHuron, CA in the San Joaquin Valley from
hydrolyzed casein (HC) and retail12 to 23 January 1999 , determine the
products that contain HC in reducingefficacy of Flight Control TM (50%
deer damage to trees and shrubs wasanthraquinone) and Mesurol R (75%
determined in a field experimentsmethiocarb) in preventing horned lark
conducted in USA during 2004-05. Thedamage to lettuce seedlings. Flight
results of the experiments indicate thecontrol TM (FC) and Mesurol R were
suitability of HC as a deer repellent.evaluated as foliar sprays at
Technical grade HC completely eliminatedapplication rates of 2.79 and 2.27 kg
browsing damage to evergreen shrubsha-1, respectively. Horned lark damage
(Gaultheria shallon) and conifers (Thujato lettuce seedlings treated with
plicata). Retail sources of HC were notanthraquinone was greater (p=0.015) than
as effective as the pure hydrolyzedfor methiocarb R, 60 versus 20% ,
protein (Kimball et al 2005).respectively, and seedlings in control
Âplots were 100% destroyed. While this
Âlevel of damage is probably unacceptable
9. Blackbird damagesto lettuce growers, it should be
         The economic impactremembered that the enclosure situation
of blackbirds can be severe to ricecaused an artificially high bird
producers in the United States. Onepressure on the crop. Further studies in
approach to managing this damage is theopen fields under a more normal bird
application of bird-deterrent chemicalpressure are warranted ( York et al
to the crop. Previous pilot trials2000).
suggested that caffeine offeredÂ
potential as a safe, economical bird29. Ozone injury
repellent. In this study, cage feeding         Incidence and
trials with female red -wingedseverity of visible foliar ozone injury
blackbirds and male brown headedon cutleaf coneflower (Rudbeckia
cowbirds confirmed that a treatment ratelaciniata L.) and crown-bread (Verbesina
of 25000 ppm caffeine on rice seedOccidentalis Walt). Were determined .It
reduced consumption as much as 76% .is thus a matter of consideration that
Trials with mixed species blackbirdszone injury may harm vegetation harmed
flocks in a 0.2-ha flight pen resultedby browsing or even cutting. Ozone
in just 4% loss of caffine-treated riceinjury was greatest on the lower leaves
compared to 43% loss of untreated rice.for both species sampled with over 95%
. Field trials of a 10 000 ppm caffeineof the injured leaves occurring on the
treatment in Louisiana revealed > 90% oflower 50% of the plant. This is the
caffeine-treated rice seed remainedfirst report of foliar ozone injury on
unconsumed on days 2 and 3 of the studythese plant species in situ, in the
whereas blackbirds consumed > 80% of thePark, illustrating the great variability
untreated seed. As a rice seed treatmentin symptom expression with time, and
to deter blackbirds, caffeine appears towithin and between populations (
be effective, economical andChappelka et al 2003).
environmentally safe, althoughÂ
additional aquatic toxicity testing is30. Protected arrears and humans
desirable. Improvements in formulation         Knowledge of
will be needed to make the compoundconflicts between people and protected
practical for general agricultural sprayareas is required for the design of
applications and to extend the adherencesustainable conservation strategies for
of caffeine to rice seeds in fieldthe management of most protected areas.
conditions ((Avery et al 2005).The study identifies the causes of
Âconflicts between local people and the
10. Deer damageBenous Wildlife Conservation Area
A questionnaire was distributed to over(BWCA), which includes the Benous
2500 farms to know damage caused byNational Park, In northern Cameroon.
lowland deer to crops, trees andInformal interviews and questionnaires
vegetation. Results from thewere administered to 114 households in
questionnaire showed that 69% (n=1192)three communities, and to 17 park staff
of responding farmers had deer on theirand 7 professional hunting guides from
holdings and that Roe and Fallow wereJuly -October 1997. Crop damage affected
the most frequently seen species. On86% of the surveyed household, with 31%
those farms with deer present, cerealsof crop income lost on average, and with
were the most commonly damaged cropthe damage varying significantly between
(44%), but only 15% of these farmerscommunities. Elephants, baboons, patas
claimed that the annual cost of damagemonkeys. Warthogs and green parrots
to cereals exceeded £500 each year foraccounted for 97% of crop damage, with
the whole farm. Validation assessmentsthe staple food maize and millet being
were based on two visits to assess deermost affected. Of the respondents 27%
damage to the crop, with a deer speciesexperienced livestock depredation, with
density assessment during the March18% of livestock income lost on
assessment and an assessment of grainaverage. The civet cat was the main
yield and quality during the Augustpredator. The involvement of local
assessment. Respondents were generallypeople in illegal activities, theirÂ
accurate in the density and species oflack of access to natural resources, and
deer reported. The percentage of thedamage by wildlife were identified as
farm suffering damage attributable toprincipal causes of conflicts. Local
deer was very variable, generally beingpeople, park staff and professional
higher at the first assessment than thehunting guides had diverse and differing
second. The figures calculated for yieldperceptions about the causes of the
loss were generally low, Farmers wereconflicts and made various suggestions
poor at estimating the economic impactfor reduction of wildlife damage
of deer damage when compared toincluding animal scaring and controlled
validation data, but a number ofshooting. We conclude that, under
parameters may have changed in the twocurrent wildlife policy, conflict
years between the questionnairebetween people and BWCA Â (Bonous
distribution and validation, includingWildlife Conservation area) is difficult
changes in deer density, crop rotations,to resolve. To reduce conflicts and
and the marked drop in grain prices,promote sustainable conservation, we
which may account for some of thesuggest co-management of wildlife
inaccuracies. There were noinvolving all stakeholders,
statistically significant relationshipsestablishment of crop damage control
between deer damage assessments andteams, and promotion of tangible
yield loss, either for individualbenefits to  local people. There may be
species or both species combined. Thea requirement for site -specificity in
relationship between Roe deer damage atmanagement strategies (Weladji et al
the harvest assessment and Roe deer2003).
density was significant (Post et al,Â
2001).31. Low technology use to avoid damages
Wildlife managers must consider the          It is suggested
public's preferences for wildlifethat an integrated, community-based, low
population levels when determiningtechnological approach will be the most
management policies. 849 farmers,sustainable solution to this conflict (
hunters and the general public ofOsborn et al 2003).
Maryland. USA, were surveyed in 1996 to         Blackbirds
determine their preferences for(lcteridae) annually damage US$5-8
increasing, maintaining, or decreasingmillion of ripening sunflower in the
deer population numbers. Using a randomnorthern Great Plains. Baiting
utility theoretic framework, the factorsblackbirds with avicide-treated rice
that explain preferences such asduring spring migration might reduce the
residential location, socioeconomicregional breeding populations. birds can
characteristics, landscape damage,be successfully baited with
agricultural yield loss and vehicleavicide-treated rice placed in corn
accidents were analyzed. Resultsstubble (Linz et al 2003).
suggested that the majority of people           Plant debris
benefit from deer and want to keep deeraccumulation is viewed as a key factor
population at current levels. Otherdetermining small mammal abundance and
characteristics such as age, income,potential damage in low-till
education, and residential location haveagricultural ((Stermer et al 2003)
minor or no impact on preferences.areas.
Property damage, crop loss, landscape         The projected total
damage, and car accidents appear to bevalue of crop yield losses due to
the biggest concerns ( Curtis et alwildlife damage for buffer zone villages
2001).located in Garhwal Himalaya in about
ÂRs.5 38 620 (US$15 389). Besides food
11. Sika deer population in Japangrain, horticultural crops i.e apple,
         Sika deer Cervusalso suffered.
nippon population in eastern Hokkaido,



1 A B C D 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113