Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://openscholar.ump.ac.za/handle/20.500.12714/742
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHawkins, Heidi-Jayne.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMinnie, Liaan.en_US
dc.contributor.authorvan Niekerk, HN (Walter).en_US
dc.contributor.authorde Waal, HO.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBalfour, Dave.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKerley, Graham IH.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-16T07:42:12Z-
dc.date.available2024-04-16T07:42:12Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.urihttps://openscholar.ump.ac.za/handle/20.500.12714/742-
dc.descriptionPublished versionen_US
dc.description.abstractPredation threatens the viability of livestock farming, while lethal predator management can negatively influence wildlife ecology. There is renewed interest in non-lethal vs lethal methods of livestock protection, but a systematic comparison is lacking. Using multivariate models, we explored how predator management (shepherd, no shepherd), land tenure, flock characteristics, and environmental factors drive losses of small livestock across the Northern Cape, South Africa. Black-backed jackal and caracal were the dominant livestock predators in both management groups. Predation of small livestock was five-fold lower in the shepherd (1.29% ± 0.38) compared to the non-shepherd group (6.09% ± 0.51; p < 0.0001), with a seven-fold lower-level of lamb predation (1.67% ± 0.51 vs. 11.52% ± 0.99; p < 0.0001). Predator management, livestock type, and flock size (but not land tenure or environmental factors) were predictor variables in a best-fit linear mixed effects model describing small livestock losses (p < 0.0001). We interpret our findings with caution because we could not control for predator and prey abundances, and the non-herder group could have inflated their predation estimates. While the efficacy of shepherding requires more research, we suggest that it is a viable predation management approach in South Africa and beyond.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francisen_US
dc.subjectBlack-backed jackal.en_US
dc.subjectCaracal.en_US
dc.subjectCommunal farmers.en_US
dc.subjectHuman–wildlife conflict.en_US
dc.subjectPrivate farmers.en_US
dc.titleShepherding is not a shot in the dark: evidence of low predation losses from the Northern Cape province of South Africa.en_US
dc.typejournal articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2989/10220119.2022.2156610-
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Cape Townen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Mpumalangaen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of the Free Stateen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of the Free Stateen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationNelson Mandela Metropolitan Universityen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationNelson Mandela Metropolitan Universityen_US
dc.relation.issn1022-0119en_US
dc.description.volume40en_US
dc.description.issue4en_US
dc.description.startpage373en_US
dc.description.endpage384en_US
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypejournal article-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.grantfulltextopen-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in UMP Scholarship are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.