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 i generaldetermine their preferences for increasing,
discussionsmaintaining, or decreasing deer population
numbers. Using a random utility theoretic
G.M.  Waniframework, the factors that explain
preferences such as residential location,
Ph.D  ;  D.V.M  (Germany)socioeconomic characteristics, landscape
damage, agricultural yield loss and vehicle
FN  ISSGAPU,  FN  DAADaccidents were analyzed. Results suggested
that the majority of people benefit from deer
Director  Extension  Education  /  SAMETIand want to keep deer population at current
levels. Other characteristics such as age,
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agriculturalincome, education, and residential location
Sciences  and  Technology  of  Kashmirhave minor or no impact on preferences.
Property damage, crop loss, landscape damage,
Shalimar,  Srinagar,  191121and car accidents appear to be the biggest
concerns  (  Curtis  et  al  2001).
Â
Â
Â
11.  Sika  deer  population  in  Japan
Â
         Sika deer Cervus
A brief global review to asses the damagenippon population in eastern Hokkaido, Japan,
caused to cultivated crops by wild animalsincreased rapidly during 1990-1998 . This
around the world. The review was attempted inincrease appeared to have halted in
response to a recommendation of ICAR Regional1999-2000, probably due to increased hunting
Committee No.1 held in Oct, 2007 at Solan,and nuisance control. The period of rapid
H.p. presided over by Hon'ble Directorincrease was associated with a
General, ICAR Dr. Mangala Rai inaugurationdisproportionately rapid increase in
was chaired by Hon'ble Agriculture Ministercompensation paid for deer damage to crops.
J&K,  Jenab  Ab.  Aziz  Zargar.We studied changes in diet during 1990-2000,
as reflected by stable isotope ratios of C
              Âand N in tooth collagen. We hypothesized that
              Âisotope ratios would demonstrate dietary
              Âshifts related to population levels and/or
              Âtime, and that shifts in isotope ratios would
  Â  Â Authorbe consistent with increasing individualÂ
consumption of pasture grasses at higher
Âpopulation levels, delta 13C isotope ratios
of tooth collagen in 3 year-old sika
              Âindicated a diet dominated by C3 plants
              Âthroughout the period, and that forage
  Â  Â  Â  Âspecies other than pasture grasses and dwarf
bamboo Sasa nipponica ( the main crop and
Âwoodland understory plants, respectively)
were important elements. There was a
Âsignificant decline in the delta 13C isotope
ratio during 1990-2000 in both males and
Âfemales, delta 15N values showed no trend
with time for males, but increased over time
Published by:Â Director State Agriculturalin females. Indices of population (Sightings
Management and Extension Training Instituteper Unit Effort, SPUE) were negatively
of Kashmir (SAMETI-K) , SKUAST-K , Shalimar ,correlated with female delta 13C, and
Post  Box:  461,  G.P.O,  Srinagar.positively correlated with female delta 15N,
values indicating a shift in diet over the
Âperiod , especially among females. This shift
may be related to population and/or offtake
Âlevels, in particular the rapid increase
in female offtake for nuisance control and
              Âhunting during the period. The data are
     Publication No: SAMETI/Pub/3consistent with a relative increase in
1000/January,  2008pasture grass consumption per individual at
higher population levels, however, otherÂ
Âexplanations of the data are equally
plausible. Possible dietary changes, and
Âother factors, influencing the observed shift
in isotope ratios are discussed. Although
Âstatistically significant, the magnitude of
dietary shifts nevertheless appeared
P.O.Box: 461, GPO, Srinagar, E.Mail: Â Â Âsmall, and did not provide evidence which
      Phone:     Âwould justify modifying the current policy,
0194-2461317,0194-2463460,0194-2463459Âof limiting crop damage through managed
population reduction to about 25% of peak
         Cell:    Âlevels(  Halley  et  al  2006).
   09419095342 ;
Residence:0194-2431508,2435741Â
Â12. White-tailed  deer  damages
ÂÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â White-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus) may cause more
Âdamage than any other species of wildlife.
These damages include crop loss, automobile
Introduction:and aviation collisions, disease
transmission, environmental degradation, and
Âdestruction of ornamental plantings. One
practical method of controlling deer damage
      Wild animal-humanis the use of exclusionary fences. The
conflicts have started since beginning ofrelatively high cost of labor and materials
human era from Adam and Eve. This conflict ofrequired to build effective fences has
wilderness made man to hide in caves and helimited most applications to the protection
was called as "Cave man". Slowly, with hisof orchards, vegetable farms, other high
advancement it is he who invented Axe and-value resources, and mitigation of human
other weapon in stone and iron ages tohealth and safety risks. Improvements in
frighten the wild animals, initially. Laterfence technology resulting in less expensive,
on he hunted them to save himself. Thisyet effective fence have expanded the use of
feeling of uncertainty and fear of wildfence to manage damage caused by deer. Fence
animals and wilderness reduced with thetypically installed to manage white-tailed
invention of fire. He made sharp weapons ofdeer damage include wire or plastic mesh,
bones and iron. These initial weapons wereelectrified high-tensile steel wire, and
the beginning of this conflict, Animal humanelectrified polytape or polyrope fence. They
conflict.reviewed the scientific literature on fencing
to determine which fence designs would be the
Thirty thousand years ago, the humanmost effective for excluding deer in a
population rose to 6 million. They were stillvariety of situations (VerCauteren et al
hunters. With the invention of fire, he set2006).
fire a vast majority of sanctuaries, which
scared wild life and they migrated from his         The installation
neighborhood. Many forests, hills andof fences to protect agricultural products,
difficult terrains were still beyond thenatural resources, or other areas from deer
reach of man three thousand years before,(Odocoileus spp.) can be expensive and
although human population has increased to 60potential benefits of fencing are difficult
million. Man has already started primitiveto quantify. A rational method is needed to
agriculture. He had made his terrains andhelp evaluate whether fencing can be cost
wild life scared by him left his closeeffective and which fence designs will be
habitats and searched for fresh abodes. Manoptimal for particular applications. They
by now had lust for fur, horns, ornaments anddescribe an interactive, dynamic simulation
other forest resources. He invented manymodel that conducts economic analyses and
means to frighten whole wild life. He becamepredicts economic benefit associated with
a "Danger "not only for wild animals but forfences for crops relative to area and
his own species, environment andperimeter of protected plot, value of crop,
eco-biodiversity.percentage of crop damaged by deer annually
prior to fencing, efficacy of fence, and
Three hundred years ago he industrializedcosts of fence materials and labor. Users of
crop production and produced enough food, forthe model can easily adjust these variables
nearly 600 million people. This continued andto fit their individual situations and needs.
from 30 year now he is feeding 6000 millionBy running a series of simulations, model
people. Today we have a global food securityusers can answer questions related directly
for 7.5 billion. Human food security gainsto fence efficacy and cost-effectiveness
resulted in reduction of all other wild(VerCauteren  K  et  al  2006).
species, thus, the origin of wild- life-
human conflict is the lust of man for moreÂ
food, more luxury or sometimes fun for
hunting or fur. This reduced wild life13.  Corn  damage  by  wild  life
reserves and now a open conflict came into
existence.         Corn damages in
USA were estimated at 6.6 per hac due to wild
Many man-wild life conflicts have beenlife. The white tailed deer was the wild
reported from Gir forests of Gujarat, Rajajianimal responsible for loss. The average
National Park in UP and many other stateshacters owned by farmers were 125 out of
where forest lands became cultivable lands.which 55 hectares were sown corn. (Tzilkowsi
Elephants, wild boars, monkeys, squirrels,et  al  2002).
deer , birds like crows, parakeets, wild
dogs, jackals, gaur, sambur, langure, fowls,Â
pea cocks, neilgai, Hippos, biats,
blackbirds, rodents, wild pigs, feral14.  Â  Deer  Damage
species, primates, beetles, foxes, pigeons,
feral hogs and a variety of other species         Deer (Odocoileus
damage crops. The carnivores even attackspp.) can cause substantial damage to
human too. These attacks are for search ofagricultural crops, resulting in economic
food or their loss of habitat. Many suchlosses for producers. They developed a deer
accidents came to be known in Jammu andactivated bio-acoustic frightening device to
Kashmir. The bear leopod and other wildreduce white-tailed deer (O, virginianus)
animals are reducing in number. Theirdamage in agricultural fields. The device
habitats  used  by  human.considered of an infrared detection system
that activated an audio component which
The human causalities are due to carnivorousbroadcast recorded distress and alarm calls
species, but herbivores inflict economic andof deer. They tested the device against
human losses too. The crop damages by wildunprotected controls in cornfields during the
life has been the new threat to agriculturalsilking-tasseling stage of growth in July
productivity throughout the world. This also2001. The device was not effective in
concerns us in Asia and India. This review isreducing damage: track-count indices
aimed  to  find  out:(F1,4=0.02), corn yield (F1,9=1.27,P=0.289),
and estimated damage levels (F1,10=0.87,
1.      Extent of damage toP=0.374) did not differ between experimental
crops.and control fields. The size
(F2,26=1,00,P=0.380), location
2.  Â  Â  Â   Nature of crop damage(F2,25=0.39,P=0.684), and percent overlap
(F2,25=0.20,P=0.818) of use-areas of
3.      Ways and means toradiomarked female deer did not differ
prevent  these  losses.between during and after treatment periods.
They concluded that the deer-activated
4.      A strategic planning tobio-acoustic device was not effective in
drive a line between wildlife conservationprotecting cornfields in this study; however,
and  farm  economics  especially  in  India.the device may be more effective in small
areas such as gardens or for high value crops
Âthat do not grow tall enough to offer
protective  cover  (Gilsdorf  et  al  2004).
Executive Abstracts and Strategic
elementaries:  [EASE]Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â White -tailed
deer (Odocoileus virginianus) cause millions
1.  Â  Â  Â Importanceof dollars of damage to agricultural crops
annually . They tested the effectiveness of
              Âpropane exploders and Electronic Guards
   Species causing crop damages ranges(Pocatello Supply Depot, Pocatello, Id). For
from elephant's wild birds, monkeys,reducing deer damage in corn fields during
squirrels, deer, parakeet, wild dogs, foxes,the silking-tasseling stage of growth.
deer and many others like Neilgai. On anTrack-count indices (F2,7=0.70,P=0.532), corn
average this damage to crops by wild animalsyield (F2,6=0.14, P=0.873), and estimated
amounts to U$ 961 per hectare. It is muchdamage levels (F2, 12=1,45 P=0.272) did not
more than an Indian Farmer earns from adiffer between experimental and control
hacter annually. Therefore, by thesefields. The size (F2,11=0.08,P =0.924),
estimates, the damages are spectacular andLocation (F2,9=0.30, P=0.750), and percent
economically  important.overlap (F2,9=0.46, P=0.644) of use -areas of
radiomarked female deer in the vicinity of
2.      Human Elephant conflictsexperimental fields did not differ among
(HEC):before, during and after 18 day treatment
periods. In a related study, we placed
         i) Economicpropane exploders in cornfields within
Losses:use-areas of 12 radiomarked female deer. The
deer did not react appreciably to the
              Âdevices; the size (F2, 17=0.08, P=0.921),
   Among elephants crop raiding islocation (F2,22=1.37, P=0.275), and percent
common. The crops near their home ranges areoverlap (f2,10=0.47, P=0.636) of deer use
damaged more. Elephants damaging crops hadareas did not differ among before, during,
twice big ranges than those who did notand after 14 day treatment periods. They
damage the crops. Thus, more proximity of theconclude that propane exploders and
crops near their ranges are prone to cropsElectronic Guards have limited potential for
damages. Train accidents instigate elephantsreducing deer damage to corn at the
more to crop or human damages. Indonesia sawsilking-tasseling stage (Glisdorf et al
more frequent raids of elephants on crops.2004l.
Human elephant conflict (HEC) is frequent and
poses serious challenges in Africa. Both maleÂ
groups and family group attacks have been
observed. HEC losses in West Bengal were         A welfare measure
worth 3.2 croses of Rupees. This damagefor wildlife damage to Ontario (Canada) field
occurred in 3368sq kms.radius. The numericalcrop producers during the 1998 was. The
number of elephants was 62 only. Assamwelfare measure presented in this study
observes damages to the woodcutters byprovides a more accurate picture of losses
elephants Asian wild Elephants raid andfrom wildlife damage to agricultural. Other
damage crops in herds of 10-13 individuals ordamage estimates based on yield loss
big herds comprising 50-74 elephants. Inoverstate the damage since benefits from
Darjeeling district alone over an area of 200wildlife are netted out. Results for the
kms. East to west, in last two decades 277Ontario field crop producers indicate that
houses were demolished by elephants, killingthe magnitude of the difference between the
66 people in 5 districts. As a result of thisvalue of the yield loss and the welfare
conflict 23 elephants lost their lives. Inmeasure of damage is approximately 50%. This
2001, economic loss of the order of US fiftydifference indicates that most farmers were
thousand dollars was estimated to bewilling to tolerate the wildlife damage they
inflicted by elephants. This scenarioexperienced  (Heigh  et  al  2001).
necessitates comprehensive measures to be
taken to lessen these damage. The review ofÂ
the measures, around the world suggest
following few studies to be undertaken and15.  Grapevine  damages
resultant measures to be applied to lessen
these damages.ii)    Mitigation of         In field trials
losses:in 1999-2000 in Gundla Pochampally, Andhra
Pradesh, India , the incidence of damage to
         Methods developedgreen grapevines was studied. Visits to the
and used to mitigate crop damages byvines by bats begain around 45 minutes after
elephants consisted of frightening of animalssunset and foraging continued until 1 hourÂ
by drum beating, firegracks or even air gunbefore sunrise. Damage occurred to ripe fruit
fires. Guarding the crops by fences or evenonly, and increased around harvesting time,
using electric fencing or raising poles andpercentage damage ranged from 0 to 100%
wiring may be effective. Chemical based(Bhargavi  et  al,  2001).
deterrents, and electric fencing have been
found to reduce crop damages. High voltageÂ
electric fencing using energizers in west
have prevented wild animals damaging crop but16.  Â  Â  Hippo  damage
this preposition may not be applicable in
areas where even habitations do not have         The introduction
access to electricity. However, this methodto the paper described the various ecological
may act as a temporary boundary separatingeffects known to result from grazing,
wild and domestic habitats. This couldmovement along paths, and wallowing by the
prevent intrusions from sly vatic to domesticcommon hippo. Hippopotamus amphibious. The
foci. Guarding fields, digging trenches,study reported was carried out at Kainji Lake
modifying cropping patterns have aNational Park., Nigeria, during  the dry
possibility of reducing man elephantseason periods {of 1991 and 1992} . The
conflicts or Human elephant conflicts. A 30%method adopted by Agnew, A.D.Q. (East African
open space between two habitats may help toWildlife Journal (1966) 4, 38-46) was used to
avoid HEC. This means a distance to beassess hippo foraging footprints at three
maintained between cropping fields andhippo pool sites. A total of 32 footpaths
elephant habitates. A proper investigation onwere enumerated out of which 18 were located
these lines is needed. A grid basedat Kaii hippo pool site, while the frequency
geographical information system (GIS) with aof utilization of paths was also higher for
25Km2 resolution may help to have costthis site relative to those in other area.
effective data source to analyze theseThe upstream-downstream trend in hippo
situations. There is urgent need ofoccupancy of dry  season water pools could
identifying spatial predictors of HEC. On theexpose the hippo to crop damage conflicts at
basis of this study one can suggest or planthe  peripheral  areas.
mitigation strategies, early warnings of
attacks, use of barriers and deterrents. TheÂ
utility of the methods could be assessed for
land use and livelihood strategies to limit17. Hygo-Japan-mammal  crop  damages
HEC.
Â
Â
         Mammals
3.  Â  Â  Â  Â  Dear-Nilgai Damages.inhabiting  Hyogo consist of seven orders,
17 families and about 40 species. Except for
         A survey of 2500Lagomorpha and Artiodactyla, the remaining
farms in UK revealed that 69% (n=192) cerealfive orders among them include species which
crops were damaged by deer. This damageneed some protection and they total about 55%
costed £500 per annum per farm. Damagesof all species excluding extinct, introduced
varied with deer density. In USA too deerand feral species. Ecological information in
damages comprised of crop loss, landscapeHyogo prefecture has been accumulated in few
damages, car accidents and property damages.protection-required species there is no
Nilgai damages alongwith deer damages arerecent information of spatial distribution on
common in India too. Tree cover of Acacia inOriental water-shrew, Japanese noctule-bat
the area is generally used as shelter byand Japanese dormouse; and little information
Nilgai. We have encountered huge crop damageon Japanese shrew, Japanese horse-shoe bat,
in Mathura (CIRG) and nearby area by NilgaiJapanese large -footed bat. Schreiber's
visits. Grazing and browsing of Nilgaibent-winged bat, Japanese tube-nosed bat,
inflict losses on farms. This is regarded ascommon parti-colored bat, Japanese squirrel,
a mammalian crop threat by the farmers. ThisJapanese small flying-squirrel, Japanese
behaviour of their inflict ozone injury togiant flying-squirrel, smith's vole harvest
the young sapling, so precious for the growthmouse and Japanese badger. Damage and
of  trees  in  Indian  semi-arid  farms.population managements is also necessary in
sika deer and Japanese wild boar, to reduce
Âtheir crop--damaging, and comprehensive
management in Japanese black bear, an
         Corn damages byendangered local population, to prevent
deer in USA amounts to 6.6.% per hectare. Inhuman-bear fatal accident. Habitat alteration
an area where a farmer owned 125 hectare ondue to human activities, however, has
an average 55 hectares were used to sow corn.affected the population sizes and spatial
There is a 6.6% loss of the product which isdistribution of all these, mammals in Hyogo.
a huge economic loss. Similar damages by deerHabitat management has priority over damage.
in Ontario, Canada, Portugal, Japan, SouthFundamental and applied scientific studies
America and other parts of the world haveand understanding of ecology and wildlife
been reviewed. In Virginia too a studymanagement science needs promotion by
involving 1506 agricultural producer farmerscitizens  (Mitani  M  2000).
revealed 58% of them experiencing deer
damages. Ways and means to prevent suchÂ
attacks on crops have been reviewed. Most of
the possible measures to be adopted are18.  Monkey  damage
similar to these described for elephants
(HEC).Â
ÂÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Forty-seven
property owners in Entebbe, Uganda were
4.  Â  Â Other  Mammal  and bird damagesquestioned about vervet monkey activities on
their property. The objective was to
Âinvestigate the interactions between humans
and vervet monkeys in an agricultural area
         Monkey damagesadjacent to a forest zone. Other studies have
maize, sweet potato and other crops. It isreported that farms located within 300 m of a
suggested to reduce or change croppingforested boundary probably incur the greatest
pattern or alternating with non-agriculturalrisk of crop-raiding. Two other factors that
activities near location of monkey habitats.may influence susceptibility to vervet
Various methods are reviewed. Bat damage,crop-raiding were also examined: the types of
Hygo crop damages in Japan, Grape winecrops grown and the types of direct
damages by bats in Andra Pradesh, India havepreventive measures used. The effect of these
been studied. Crop economic loss assessmenttwo factors on vervet crop-raiding is not
has been reviewed in these pages. Cloverstraight forward. However, the distance a
rather than grass can reduce wild mammalproperty is located from the forest edge is
damages. Alley cropping of black walnutsan important factor influencing vervet crop
helped to save soyabean and maize cropraiding. Surveyed  gardens 200 m from theÂ
damages. Pesticide damages wildlife andforest edge received significantly less crop
minimize their attacks, enclosures and other-raiding than farms located 100 or 50m
electric fencing help to avoid such damage.(P=0.040,< alpha=0.05). In this study, 8 out
Can one use harmful means to save crops, needof 13 farmers (61.5%) said that maize, sweet
a suitable strategy to preserve ecology andpotato, or both, were most likely to be
biodiversity. Both crops and wild animalsdamaged by the vervets. Other crops singled
need security and conservation. A managementout by the farmers are receiving damage by
strategy is needed to safeguard human andthe vervets were bananas, mangoes, groundnuts
wildlife equally. Â A policy framework isand yam. They suggest that the development of
envisaged.non-agricultural activities on land
directly adjacent to forested areas may
Âreduce vervet crop -raiding by deterring
vervets from traveling greater distances from
         Blackbird cropthe forest edge due to increased obstacles or
damage in USA amounts to 5-8 million dollars.risks  Â  (Saj  et  al  2001).
A considerable sum of crores of rupees have
been estimated to be damages in the form ofÂ
crop, human and property losses by wild
animals, birds and other rodents in India.19.  Bait  damage
Many measures to reduce these losses are
needed  and  have  been  reviewed.         The longevity of
zinc phosphide (ZP) on whole wheat bait Â
Âwas determined at the end of the "dry" and
"wet" seasons, Â is Western Australia..
ÂWhile the total rainfall during the two
trials was 74 mm and 155mm, substantial loss
Âof ZP was recorded only after significant
rainfall events. Irrespective of season, the
Âloss of ZP from bait applied in bait stations
was minimal. The maximum recorded loss was
Â17% and this occurred after 21 days'
exposure during the wet season where the bait
Reviewstations were placed in-crop. Nevertheless,
regardless of the application method,
1.  Wild  animals  damaging  cropssufficient ZP always remained on the wheat
bait. Theoretically  it was lethal to rats
To elephants wild boar, porcupine, rheusfor at least 8-14 days (Twigg et al., Â
macaque (Macaca mulatta), hoary-bellied2001).
squirrel, barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak),
red-breasted parakeet (Psittacula alexandri),20.Venezuela  experience:
and wild dog are wild animals damaging crops.
         In Venezuela,
Methods developed and being used to mitigatelethal control of wintering Dickcissels
man-wildlife conflict include, frightening(Spiza Americana) is considered a threat to
the animals; guarding the crops; and usingthe species survival. To help farmers protect
some sort of scarecrow and traps (Miah et altheir rice and sorghum crops from by
2001).Dickcissels and to minimize the killing of
large numbers of these birds, alternative
Accurate estimation of crop damage bynon-lethal crop protection measures are
wildlife (raccoons, white-tailed deer, andneeded. To that end, the responses of captive
coyotes) often requires labour-intensiveDickcissels to three bird-repellent chemicals
sampling procedure. Variable area transect(anthraquinone,methyl anthranilate and
(VAT) sampling has been identified as amethiocarb) applied to rice seed were
potential labour-saving alternative toevaluated. In one-cup feeding trials,
quadrat  sampling  (  Engerman  et  al 2002).treatments of methiocarb (0.05% g/g, applied
as Mesurol 75%Â wettable powder) and
Âanthraquinone (0.5%, applied as Flight
Control) reduced consumption of rice by 70%
2.  Wild  life  Human  conflictsrelative to pretreatment consumption. Other
anthraquinone treatments (0.05,0.1%) and
Agricultural landowners suffer in the form ofmethyl authranilate (0.05%) were inrffective.
damage to crops, livestock, and otherIn two -cup trials, with untreated millet as
property. Some wildlife agencies maintainedthe alternative food, consumption of rice
abatement and compensation programmes. Atreated with 0.05 and 0.1%Â anthraquinone
model of deer-inflicted crop damage used towas reduced by 90% relative to pretreatment
facilitate agency decisions regarding deerlevels. Overall, Dickcissels responded to the
densities and distribution, abatement use,repellents similarly to the red-winged
and to forecast compensation. The model isblackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). Because
applied to field-level compensation claims inFlight Control has been used successfully to
Wisconsin, USA. The results are consistentreduce blackbird use of rice fields in the
with  theory,  (  Yoder  J,  2002).USA, the prospect is good for successful
reduction of damage to repening rice by
ÂDickcissels in Venezuela, particularly if
repellent use is coupled with the
3. Crop  Economic  loss  due  to wild lifeestablishment of alternative feeding sites (
Avery et al 2001). Deer selected carrots over
         People'sall  green  manure  crops.
perceptions were discerned through
participatory discussions covering 419Â
households distributed in 10 villages in the
buffer zone. Traditional uncodified rights of21.  Nilgai  damages  in  India
local people were substantially reduced
through policy interventions set in since          Crop-damage by
1860s. Local people as well as tourists havenilgai has been widely reported from India.
been excluded from the core zone covering an Are give Nilgai is for increasing in this
area of 625 km2 since 1982. Deterioration ofregion. Lack of natural predators,
rural economy due to damage to crop anddeforestation overgrazing and the protection
livestock by wildlife and, termination ofof these animals from Hindu communities are
opportunities of income from wild medicinalreasons for their overpopulation. Tree cover
plant resources and tourism in the core zoneof Acacia are generally used by nilgai as a
were the key negative impacts of conservationday time shelter but not food, Â therefore
policy felt by more than 90% of respondents.it goes for crop-raiding in the late evening
Mean annual economic loss per household wasand at night, jumping across 6-7 feet high
estimated as Rs.1285, Rs. 1195 and Rs.156 duestone wall, barbed fencing and fences of dead
to damage caused by wildlife to food crops,or live thorny plant material and any other
fruit trees and beehives, respectively, Rs.fencing/barrier made to protect the crop-.
1587Â due to ban on collection of wildDue to habit of both grazing as well as
medicinal plants for marketing and Rs.7904browsing they devore every kind of farm
due to ban on tourism in the core zone. Thespecies (both rabi and kharif crops). It has
Reserve authority granted compensation forbeen observed that eating less but destroying
livestock killed by wildlife but it wasmore by trampling and causing damage are
hardly 5% of the market value of killedtherefore regarded as serious mammalian crop
livestock as assessed by the people. Peoplepest and farmers wants to get ride of this
did not appreciate much the present benefitsunconventional pest. The farmers chase them
from the reserve management in the form ofaway by just following them by making loud
wages for carrying out afforestation work,sound by crackers or air gun fires, following
partial compensation for livestockthrough tractors, empty tin or dried pumpkin
depredation and availability of solar powerfilled with small stones and connected with
devices, wool, and spinning devices.strings. Technically, carrots(enclosures),
Approximately 95% respondents identifiedtrenching or power fencing are suggested to
empowerment of local people in respect ofmitigate the crop damage. Secondly, animals
realizing income from timber from deadcould be translocated to wildlife sanctuaries
diseased trees in community forests, incomefrom the sites they seen overcrowded or
from medicinal plants in buffer zone andsevere crop raiding problems (Goyal et al
opening of the core zone for tourism as2000).
potential development options. Improvement in
rural economy, the prime concern of localÂ
people, has not received as much attention as
legal enforcement of protection by the22. Pesticides  and  wildlife
reserve management. There is a need for
developing policies and management actionsA range of monitoring activities has shown
that serve the economic interests of localimpacts of anticholinesterase pesticides on
people together with enhancement ofUK wildlife, and continued risks are evident
environment conservation goal (Maikhuri et alfrom laboratory and field experiments,
2001).together with the scale of use in the field.
Along with other broad spectrum insecticides,
Âmany organophosphates have adverse direct
effects on non-target arthropods in farmland,
4. Crop  selection:and so are likely to contribute towards
indirect effects of pesticides on farmland
Damage was less (34%) in experimental carrotbiodiversity. The anticholinesterase
as multiple crop than carrots as only cropinsecticides have both lethal and sublethal
planted (62% damage). Staggered plantings ofeffects on aquatic wildlife, however the
canola, which continuously produced flowers,history of recent incidents of damage to
was the most effective lure crop of the greenriver ecology following the wider use of
manure crops we tested. Carrot producerssynthetic pyrethroid sheep dips, illustrates
should use electric fences or 2.4-m woventhe need to consider the implications of
wire fences, perhaps combined with staggeredchanges in the use of alternative products
canola plantings, to reduce carrotwhen reviewing these insecticides ( Burn
depredations  (  Schwab  et  al  2001).2000).
         The colver,Â
rather than fertilized grass, is more
effective cover crop on AFAs, against damage         The use of
by migratory geese. The sward should beanthraguinone-based flight control and methyl
managed to encourage clover growth, whichanthranilate-based non toxic avian foraging
would probably involve frequent cutting butrepellent we used to avoid crop damage by
no fertilizer. Further research is needed onsandhill cranes. Thought both repellents were
clover replenishment rate over the wintereffective at deterring cranes from treated
season and possible benefits of clover leyscorn, neither has been tested on corn under
to other wild life (McKay et al 2001). Alleyfield  conditions.  (Blackwell  et  al 2001).
cropping of black walnuts and percent with
maize and soyabean rotations may avoid will         Oak seedlings
animal damages. Tree -crop ratio of 1:10 maywere scientifically raised. Seedling
help(  Godsey,  2000).mortality and wild life browse damages were
minimal when certain herbicide mixture was
Âused. Biologically and aesthetically, the
procedure was extremely successful (Ezell et
5. Elephan-  human  conflicts:al  1999).
Conflicts between elephants (Elephas maximus)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Pre-commercially
and human occur in Rajaji National Parkthinned (forests are less prone to moose
(RNP), Uttar Pradesh, one of eleven reservesdamage  (McLaren  et  al,  2000).
designated in India, to conserve Asian
elephants. Elephant-human. The conflicts inÂ
RNP from 1996 to 1999 were studied, and all
human and elephant deaths or injuries caused23. Pesticide  use  in  conflicts
by conflict were recorded. The impact of
human colonies on elephant movement was         Pesticides can
studied in 18 villages along 17 km of thecause damage to man and beneficial organism.
sourthern boundary of the study site and 4Some sub-lethal effects of pesticides were
village in the Chilla-Motichur corridor.studied in birds with a view to identifyingÂ
Three male and four female elephants werecharacteristic biochemical responses that
radio tracked for 1-2 years. Primarymay be useful for the monitoring of exposure
conflicts included crop raiding, competitionto sub-lethal levels in the field. Pesticides
between humans and elephants for vegetation,were used; demeton-S-methyl,
and elephant mortality due to train(DSM),chlorpyriphos, chlorfenviphos,
accidents. Adult males that raided crops hadtriazophos, pirimicarb, methiocarb and
home ranges twice as large as adult malespermethrin. Blood was collected before
that did not raid crops. Elephants onlydosing, and 2,6,24,48 and 72 hours after the
damaged crop of fields that occurred withintreatment from the brachial vein of birds.
their home ranges. Field trails of chemicalEnzyme, activities were assayed in the plasma
based deterrents and electric fencing shouldor serum samples obtained. The assays used
be tried to reduce crop damage. Train speedswere GOT,MHD, GDH, SDH,GAMMA GT and ChE. The
need to be reduced to prevent accidentalresults showed an increase in plasma and
elephant  mortality  (Williams  et  al 2001).serum GOT and gamma-GT levels were found in
all animals treated with the previous
Âpesticides. The level of ChE increased in
birds after treatment with permethrin. It was
Wild  Elephant  damages:concluded that the pesticides cause
structural and functional changes in the
         A rapid villageliver and also, the measurement of the
and field assessments, data survey showed.previous parameter activities may be useful
Elephants raided crops at a rate of 0.53for assessing exposure and sub-lethal effects
elephants per day in Indonesia. The frequencyof pesticides on the wildlife (Dahamna et al
of crop raiding was related to vegetation2004).
type along the park border, the size and
presence of rivers, and the distance to theÂ
park's Elephant Training Centre (ETC), which
houses about 150 captive elephants. WildÂ
elephants damaged at least 450000Â m2 of
maize, rice, cassava, beans and other annual24.  IPM  and  crop  losses
crops, and close to 900 coconut, banana and
other perennial trees in the area surveyed.         The queensland
Elephants killed or injured 24 .Villagers trysugar, industry has recently implemented a
to reduce elephant damage by guarding fields,comprehensive integrated pest management
digging trenches between the park and their(IPM) system to minimize crop losses from two
fields, and modifying their croppingantive rodent species, Rattus sordidus
patterns. Elephants-human conflict decreases(canefield rat) and Melomy burtoni (climbing
the probability of support from local peoplerat). These species inflicted approximately
for conservation efforts. The approaches are$25M of damage in a major outbreak in theÂ
suggested consist of elephant trenches,1999-2000 seasons. Both of these rodents are
electric fences, external support to affectedlisted as common wildlife under the schedules
villages, and compensation to villagers forof the queensland nature Conservation
any  damage  caused  (Nyhus  et  al  2000).(Wildlife) Regulation 1994. The IPM programme
is based on understanding the ecology and
         This studybiology of each species. It incorporates a
explores land use conflict in south eastlarge-scale monitoring programme aimed at
Kajiado District, Kenya. The results ofproviding early warning of imminent rodent
household surveys conducted with farmers andbuild up to avert major outbreaks. The
herders in 1977 and 1996 to examine changesindustry has also developed a memorandum
in land management strategies are compared.of understanding with Queensland State
The conflict reflects ongoing competitionGovernment, which delivers on the industry's
over access to scarce land and waterpest management needs, while providing an
resources between herding, farming andimproved system of accountability for the
wildlife are the reason of damage of crops.taking of two of Queenslands native wildlife
This man-animal conflict needs understandingspecies. The consensus reached between the
the conditions that have created the presentcooperating parties (The Bureau of sugar
conflicts  (Compbell  et  al  2000).Experiment Stations, CANEGROWERS,
regionally-based Cane Productivity Services,
It is, therefore, suggested that 30% openand the outcomes can be negotiated between
space be used as a basic division forrural industry and environmental interests
stratifying thickets into low -use and(Hunt  et  al  2004)Â .
high-use categories for deer density
estimation. The proportions of each type         In Areas around
could be derived from grid-squareLake Mburo National Park ,large wild animals
measurements of aerial photographs (Latham Jwander in close proximity to human settlement
2000).. This poses serious conflict in terms of
crop damage. The integration of conservation
Âwith other land uses is difficult where
densely settled agricultural land surrounds a
Âprotected area potentially containing problem
animals, as is the case for several parks in
Human  elephant  conflictAfrica and Asia. The intensity of crop
raiding was quantified through the use of
         Human-elephantrandom crop quadrants/plots and area
conflict (HEC) in Africa occurs whereverestimation techniques in a portion of raided
these two species coincide, and poses seriousfields. The animal species concerned were
challenges to wild life managers, localdocumented from observations, footprints and
communities and elephants alike. Mitigationany other marks left behind. Three variables
requires a details understanding ofwere tested as predictors of damage; human
underlying patterns and processes. Althoughpopulation density, distance from the park
temporal patterns of HEC are relativelyboundary and season. In this study data is
predictable, spatial variation has shown fewpresented regarding crop loss in the
universal trends, making it difficult todifferent seasons of the year, analysis of
predict where conflict will take place. Cropcrop damage variation and animal species
raiding was further subdivided into incidentsinvolved in crop loss. A diverse assemblage
involving only male elephants or familyof animals foraged on subsistence crops and
groups. A relatively fine-resolution,analysis of crop damage revealed significant
systematic, grid -based method was used tocrop depreciation by wildlife( Kagoro et al
assign the locations of conflict incidents,2004).
and spatial relations with underlying
variables were explored using correlationÂ
analysis and logistic regression. Crop
raiding was clustered into distinct conflictÂ
zones. Both occurrence and intensity could be
predicted on the basis of the area underÂ
cultivation and, for male elephant groups,
proximity to major settlement. Conversely,25. Hawai  Pest
incidents human injury and death were less
predictable but were correlated with         The apple snail,
proximity to roads. A grid-based geographicalP.canaliculata, is an aquatic freshwater
information system (GIS) with a 25km2snail native to South America, Originally
resolution utilizing cost-effective dataimported to Hawai'i as pets for the aquarium
source, combined with simple statisticalÂtrade, they were soon introduced into wetland
tools, was capable of identifying spatialplots known as "lo's" where taro (Colocasia
predictors of HEC, At finer resolutionsesculenta), an economically and culturally
spatial autocorrelation compromised thesignificant crop, is grown. Some individuals
analyses. Synthesis and application. Thesereasoned that the snails, being edible, could
results suggest that spatial correlates ofbe harvested as food, and that raising the
HEC can be identified, regardless of the sexsnails along with the taro in the "Io's"
of the elephants involved. Moreover, thewould provide income supplemental to the taro
method described here is fully transferableharvest with minimum additional input. This
to other sites for comparative analysis ofintroduction of snails into the taro "lo'i"
HEC. Using these results to map vulnerabilityhowever, proved to be a disaster. Farmers
will enable the development and deployment offailed to take into account the voracity ,
appropriate conflict mitigation strategies,reproductive potential, and rapid growth of
such as guarding, early warning systems,the snails. Because of the ideal conditions
barriers and deterrents. The utility of suchin the taro "lo'i", the snails multiplied
methods and their strategic deployment shouldrapidly and fed heavily on the taro shoots
be assessed alongside alternative land-useand corns in many cases, destroying a
and livelihood strategies that limitcomplete crop before harvest time. Hindisight
cultivation within the elephant range (Sitatihas shown that the snails are dissipated via
et  al  2003).the irrigation system throughout the "lo'i"
and then spread to the surrounding wetland
         Human elephantareas. Large breeding populations are now
conflicts (HEC) in west Bengal was anestablished in wetland areas on the islands
economic loss worth 3.2 crores. This muchof Hawai'e, O'ahu, Kaua'I, and Maui. Some
damage occurred in 3368 sq km radiusof these wetlands are wildlife preserves
inhibiting  62  elephants  (Singh et al 2002)with state and federal mandates that restrict
the potential methods of eradication.
ÂBackground information is provided on both
P.canaliculata and taro to fully explain the
6.  Â  Â  Kerala  Surveychallenges and opportunities that this
situation  presents  (Tamaru  et  al  2006).
Crop damage by wild animals in Kerala, India,
was studied from 1993 to 1996. Data wereÂ
collected from the offices of the Kerala
Forest Department, field survey and from the26. Chemical  repellents
intensive study area at Marayur, Idukki
District. Forty-five species of crops were         Chemical feeding
destroyed by wild animals in Kerala, therepellents applied to ripening sunflower
species commonly destroyed by wild animalsmight help reduce blackbird (lcteridae)
were paddy, coconut plam , plantains ,damage, which is a chronic agricultural
cassava , arecanut, coffee, oil plam , pepperproblems from seed information harvest.
, jack tree, mulberry and manago. The mainHowever, cost are high to develop and
animals involved in crop damage were elephantregister new repellents for agricultural use.
(Elephas maximus), gaur (Bos gaurus),sambarIn 2003 and 2004, we evaluated feeding
(Cervus unicolor), wild boar (Sus scrofa),repellency of 8 pesticides registered by
bonnet macaque (Macaca radiate), commonthe Environmental Protection Agency for use
langur (Presbytis entellus), blacknaped harein sunflower. Caged red-winged blackbirds
(Lepus nigricollis) and pea fowl (Pavo(Agelaius phoeniceus) were fed unshelled
cristatus). Among these, elephants andÂsunflower seeds treated with the following
wild board gave maximum damage . Of the totalpesticides: 5 pyrethroid insecticides, an
compensation claimed by the farmers, onlyorganochlorine, an organophosphorus, and a
8.2% was sanctioned by the Kerala Forestgungicide. Compared to untreated refernce
Department. The highest crop damage (30%) wasgroups, feeding rates were reduced for 4 of
recorded from the forest ranges coming underthe 5 pyrethroid insecticides. Only the
the Northern Circle: pinapple (47%) , sweetorganophosphorus (chlorpyrifos), however,
potato (47%), tapioca (42%), alocasia (39%) ,significantly decreased feeding rates. More
beans (25%) and plantains (23%) recordedresearch on repellency effects of this
highest percentage of damage. In theproduct in field efficacy trials is probably
intensive study area at Marayur, 28 specieswarranted based on the results of our cage
of crops were damaged and highest damage wasexperiments. Depending on timing of
during the summer months. At maximum damageapplication, registered insecticides with
was due to elephant (72%) followed by gaurblackbird feeding repellency could provide
(62%) , sambar (17%) and wild boar (16%) .supplemental economic benefits to sunflower
Tiger (Panthera tigris), panther (leopard)producers through dual purpose use ((Linz et
(Panthera pardus) and wild dog (Conineal  2006).
alpinus) were the main cattle lifters in the
state. A total of 31 deaths and 64 injuriesÂ
caused by wild animals were recorded from the
state during the period 1983 to 1993.27.  Persistent  organic  pollutants  (POPS)
Thirteen indigenous methods used for
controlling the crop damage had been         Persistent
identified. High voltage electric fencingorganic pollutants (POPs) have spread
using energizer was effective for stoppingthroughout the global environment to threaten
elephants and other herbivores from enteringhuman health and damage ecosystems, with
the agriculture fields. Crop damage is foundevidence of POPs contamination in wildlife,
to be linked to the cropping pattern andhuman blood, and breast milk documented
location of the agriculture fields. Shortworldwide. Based on data from the US Food and
term and long-term measures needed to preventDrug Administration, this article provides a
the crop damage are discussed (JaysonÂbrief overview of POPs residues in common
EA,1999).foods in the USA food supply. The analysis
focuses on 12 chemical compounds now targeted
Âfor an international phase out under the
Stockholm convention on POPs. The available
7.  Â  Bird  crop  damagesinformation indicates that POPs residues are
present in virtually all categories of foods,
Âincluding baked goods, fruit, vegetables,
meat, poultry, and dairy products. Residues
Use of non-lethal method to avoid cropof five or more persistent toxic chemicals in
damages by bird have been reported. Blueberrya single food item are not unusual, with the
damages by cedar waxwings (Bombycillamost commonly found POPs being the pesticides
cedrotun  were minimized. (Avery et al 2002).DDT ( and its metabolites, such as DDE) and
dieldrin. Estimated daily doses of dieldrin
Âalone exceed the US Environmental Protection
Agency and US Agency for Toxic Substances
8.  Wild  Bird  damageDisease Control reference dose for children.
Given the widespread occurrence of POPs in
Âthe food supply and the serious health risks
associated with even extremely small levels
         In the northernof exposure, prevention of further food
Great Plains of USA, conflicts betweencontamination must be a national health
red-winged black birds (Agelaius phoeniceus)policy priority in every country.
and sunflower (Helianthus annus)Â growersImplementation of the Stockholm Convention
have intensified since the late 1960s dueÂwill prevent further accumulation of
to the expanded commercial production ofpersistent toxic chemicals in food. Early
sunflowers. We studied the potentialratification and rapid implementation of this
population effects of the removal of up to 2treaty should be an urgent priority for all
million red-winged blackbirds annually undergovernments  (Schafer  et  al  2002).
a 5 year programme of baiting during spring
with DRC-1339 (3-choloro-4 methalalanine)Â
treated rice. They also examined whether
lethal control, in combination with current28.  Netherland  experiences
levels of breeding habitat management, would
be cost effective in decreasing depredation         Traditionally,
of sunflower crops during late summer.pink-footed geese Anser Brachyrhynchus
They evaluated the cost benefit ration for 4wintering in Denmark, the Netherlands and
culling scenarios involving (1) variableBelgium have used the Danish sites only
annual cullus, not exceeding 2 million birds,during mild winter, rapidly moving southwards
with and without density compensation (i.e.in case of cold spells. Since the 1980s, an
,a positive density-dependent response) onincreasing number of geese have remained on
adult survival and (2) culls of 2 millionthe Danish wintering grounds despite cold
birds annually with and without densityspells, foraging on pastures Because winter
compensation .We constructed a red -wingedwheat represented a reliable and profitable
blackbird population model represented asfood source even in sever winter, the recent
an age-based matrix and calibrated to stablechange in Agricultural practice has enhanced
growth. We assumed a total population of 27the development of a new wintering strategy
million birds on 1 April (week 1),of pink-footed geese, allowing a northward
representing the red-winged blackbirdexpansion of their winter range. Potentially,
breeding population staging in easternthis will increase the crop damage conflict
Southern Dakota and migrating into Northand may lead to further population growth (
Dakota.Under each culling scenario, weTherkidsen  et  al  2000).
reduced the stable red-winged blackbird
population (Equally for females and males)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Enclosure trials
and project the population through week 23 ofnear Huron, CA in the San Joaquin Valley from
the annual cycle (2 Sep). We then evaluated12 to 23 January 1999 , determine the
the associated costs of the managementefficacy of Flight Control TM (50%
relative to potential sunflower crop losses,anthraquinone) and Mesurol R (75% methiocarb)
assuming $0.07 in damage per bird and 4%in preventing horned lark damage to lettuce
loss to other factors. Variable annual culls,seedlings. Flight control TM (FC) and Mesurol
likely the more biologically realistic modelR were evaluated as foliar sprays at
scenarios, yielded mean annual removals of 1application rates of 2.79 and 2.27 kg ha-1,
240 560 (SE=12 328) birds with densityrespectively. Horned lark damage to lettuce
compensation and 1 231 620 (SE=28 811) birdsseedlings treated with anthraquinone was
without density compensation,, with costgreater (p=0.015) than for methiocarb R, 60
benefit ratios of 1:2.3 and 1:3.6,versus 20% , respectively, and seedlings in
respectively. Annual intrinsic rates for thecontrol plots were 100% destroyed. While this
model population over the 5 year periodlevel of damage is probably unacceptable to
ranged from 1-4 to 4.8%. Consideringlettuce growers, it should be remembered that
potential variability in the effectiveness ofthe enclosure situation caused an
the cull and the combination of direct andartificially high bird pressure on the crop.
indirect costs,we contend that theFurther studies in open fields under a more
realized benefits to sunflower growers bynormal bird pressure are warranted ( York et
lethal control of red-winged blackbiards viaal  2000).
spring baiting , in combination with current
nonlethal management efforts, would likely beÂ
negligible  (Blackwell  et  al  2003).
29.  Ozone  injury
         The efficacy of
hydrolyzed casein (HC) and retail products         Incidence and
that contain HC in reducing deer damage toseverity of visible foliar ozone injury on
trees and shrubs was determined in a fieldcutleaf coneflower (Rudbeckia laciniata L.)
experiments conducted in USA during 2004-05.and crown-bread (Verbesina Occidentalis
The results of the experiments indicate theWalt). Were determined .It is thus a matter
suitability of HC as a deer repellent.of consideration that zone injury may harm
Technical grade HC completely eliminatedvegetation harmed by browsing or even
browsing damage to evergreen shrubscutting. Ozone injury was greatest on the
(Gaultheria shallon) and conifers (Thujalower leaves for both species sampled with
plicata). Retail sources of HC were not asover 95% of the injured leaves occurring on
effective as the pure hydrolyzed proteinthe lower 50% of the plant. This is the first
(Kimball  et  al  2005).report of foliar ozone injury on these plant
species in situ, in the Park, illustrating
Âthe great variability in symptom expression
with time, and within and between populations
Â(  Chappelka  et  al  2003).
9.  Blackbird  damagesÂ
         The economic30.  Protected  arrears  and  humans
impact of blackbirds can be severe to rice
producers in the United States. One approach         Knowledge of
to managing this damage is the application ofconflicts between people and protected areas
bird-deterrent chemical to the crop. Previousis required for the design of sustainable
pilot trials suggested that caffeine offeredconservation strategies for the management of
potential as a safe, economical birdmost protected areas. The study identifies
repellent. In this study, cage feedingthe causes of conflicts between local people
trials with female red -winged blackbirdsand the Benous Wildlife Conservation Area
and male brown headed cowbirds confirmed that(BWCA), which includes the Benous National
a treatment rate of 25000 ppm caffeine onPark, In northern Cameroon. Informal
rice seed reduced consumption as much as 76%interviews and questionnaires were
. Trials with mixed species blackbirds flocksadministered to 114 households in three
in a 0.2-ha flight pen resulted in just 4%communities, and to 17 park staff and 7
loss of caffine-treated rice compared to 43%professional hunting guides from July
loss of untreated rice. . Field trials of a-October 1997. Crop damage affected 86% of
10 000 ppm caffeine treatment in Louisianathe surveyed household, with 31% of crop
revealed > 90% of caffeine-treated rice seedincome lost on average, and with the damage
remained unconsumed on days 2 and 3 of thevarying significantly between communities.
study whereas blackbirds consumed > 80% ofElephants, baboons, patas monkeys. Warthogs
the untreated seed. As a rice seed treatmentand green parrots accounted for 97% of crop
to deter blackbirds, caffeine appears to bedamage, with the staple food maize andÂ
effective, economical and environmentallymillet being most affected. Of the
safe, although additional aquatic toxicityrespondents 27% experienced livestock
testing is desirable. Improvements indepredation, with 18% of livestock income
formulation will be needed to make thelost on average. The civet cat was the
compound practical for general agriculturalmain predator. The involvement of local
spray applications and to extend thepeople in illegal activities, their lack
adherence of caffeine to rice seeds in fieldof access to natural resources, and damage by
conditions  ((Avery  et  al  2005).wildlife were identified as principal causes
of conflicts. Local people, park staff and
Âprofessional hunting guides had diverse and
differing perceptions about the causes of the
10.  Deer  damageconflicts and made various suggestions for
reduction of wildlife damage including animal
A questionnaire was distributed to over 2500scaring and controlled shooting. We conclude
farms to know damage caused by lowlandthat, under current wildlife policy, conflict
deer to crops, trees and vegetation. Resultsbetween people and BWCA Â (Bonous Wildlife
from the questionnaire showed that 69%Conservation area) is difficult to resolve.
(n=1192) of responding farmers had deer onTo reduce conflicts and promote sustainable
their holdings and that Roe and Fallow wereconservation, we suggest co-management of
the most frequently seen species. On thosewildlife involving all stakeholders,
farms with deer present, cereals were theestablishment of crop damage control teams,
most commonly damaged crop (44%), but onlyand promotion of tangible benefits to Â
15% of these farmers claimed that the annuallocal people. There may be a requirement for
cost of damage to cereals exceeded £500site -specificity in management strategies
each year for the whole farm. Validation(Weladji  et  al  2003).
assessments were based on two visits to
assess deer damage to the crop, with a deerÂ
species/density assessment during the March
assessment and an assessment of grain yield31.  Low  technology  use  to  avoid  damages
and quality during the August assessment.
Respondents were generally accurate in the          It is
density and species of deer reported. Thesuggested that an integrated,
percentage of the farm suffering damagecommunity-based, low technological approach
attributable to deer was very variable,will be the most sustainable solution to this
generally being higher at the firstconflict  (  Osborn  et  al  2003).
assessment than the second. The figures
calculated for yield loss were generally low,         Blackbirds
Farmers were poor at estimating the economic(lcteridae) annually damage US$5-8 million of
impact of deer damage when compared toripening sunflower in the northern Great
validation data, but a number of parametersPlains. Baiting blackbirds with
may have changed in the two years between theavicide-treated rice during spring migration
questionnaire distribution and validation,might reduce the regional breeding
including changes in deer density, croppopulations. birds can be successfully baited
rotations, and the marked drop in grainwith avicide-treated rice placed in corn
prices, which may account for some of thestubble  (Linz  et  al  2003).
inaccuracies. There were no statistically
significant relationships between deer damage           Plant
assessments and yield loss, either fordebris accumulation is viewed as a key factor
individual species or both species combined.determining small mammal abundance and
The relationship between Roe deer damage atpotential damage in low-till agricultural
the harvest assessment and Roe deer density((Stermer  et  al  2003)  areas.
was  significant  (Post  et  al,  2001).
         The projected
Wildlife managers must consider the public'stotal value of crop yield losses due to
preferences for wildlife population levelswildlife damage for buffer zone villages
when determining management policies. 849located in Garhwal Himalaya in about Rs.5 38
farmers, hunters and the general public of620 (US$15 389). Besides food grain,
Maryland. USA, were surveyed in 1996 tohorticultural crops i.e apple, also suffered.



1 A B C D 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 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