在坦桑尼亚东南部和中部的塞卢斯和龙格瓦野生动物保护区合法和非法野生动物狩猎的见解

Gastor J. Lyakurwa, Rudolf Mremi, A. Kisingo
{"title":"在坦桑尼亚东南部和中部的塞卢斯和龙格瓦野生动物保护区合法和非法野生动物狩猎的见解","authors":"Gastor J. Lyakurwa, Rudolf Mremi, A. Kisingo","doi":"10.5897/ijbc2020.1424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a lack of consensus among conservationists regarding the association between trophy hunting and wildlife poaching. Anti-hunting groups argue that trophy hunting is against animal welfare and contributes to wildlife population decline so it must be refuted. On the other hand, pro-hunting groups for advocate regulated hunting as an essential tool for supporting habitat protection and reducing crimes. Regulated hunting creates incentives for conservation through direct and indirect methods and reduces wildlife poaching in areas where ecotourism cannot be practically viable. We used fifteen years' trophy hunting and poaching of African elephant (Loxodonta africana), lion (Panthera leo), Cape buffalo (Syncerus caffer), Common Zebra (Equus quagga), hippopotamus (Common Hippotamus amphibious) and Greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) from Selous and Rungwa game reserves in Tanzania. The results showed that there is no evidence of influence of regulated hunting on poaching rate for all species with exception of African elephant. Poaching rate of African elephant was found to be higher than the rate of regulated hunting because of limited number of quota set by Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and international restriction of elephant hunting imposed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The study suggests that the contentions to stop trophy hunting because of an increase in poaching incidents have no empirical justification. Thus, more effort should be on anti-poaching activities ensuring the adherence to legal hunting regulations.","PeriodicalId":143839,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insights of Legal and illegal wildlife hunting in Selous and Rungwa Game Reserves in the South-East and Central Tanzania\",\"authors\":\"Gastor J. Lyakurwa, Rudolf Mremi, A. Kisingo\",\"doi\":\"10.5897/ijbc2020.1424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is a lack of consensus among conservationists regarding the association between trophy hunting and wildlife poaching. Anti-hunting groups argue that trophy hunting is against animal welfare and contributes to wildlife population decline so it must be refuted. On the other hand, pro-hunting groups for advocate regulated hunting as an essential tool for supporting habitat protection and reducing crimes. Regulated hunting creates incentives for conservation through direct and indirect methods and reduces wildlife poaching in areas where ecotourism cannot be practically viable. We used fifteen years' trophy hunting and poaching of African elephant (Loxodonta africana), lion (Panthera leo), Cape buffalo (Syncerus caffer), Common Zebra (Equus quagga), hippopotamus (Common Hippotamus amphibious) and Greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) from Selous and Rungwa game reserves in Tanzania. The results showed that there is no evidence of influence of regulated hunting on poaching rate for all species with exception of African elephant. Poaching rate of African elephant was found to be higher than the rate of regulated hunting because of limited number of quota set by Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and international restriction of elephant hunting imposed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The study suggests that the contentions to stop trophy hunting because of an increase in poaching incidents have no empirical justification. Thus, more effort should be on anti-poaching activities ensuring the adherence to legal hunting regulations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":143839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5897/ijbc2020.1424\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5897/ijbc2020.1424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

动物保护主义者对战利品狩猎和野生动物偷猎之间的关系缺乏共识。反狩猎组织认为,战利品狩猎违反动物福利,导致野生动物数量下降,因此必须予以驳斥。另一方面,支持狩猎的团体主张将有管制的狩猎作为支持栖息地保护和减少犯罪的重要工具。管制狩猎通过直接和间接的方式激励保护,减少了生态旅游实际上不可行的地区的野生动物偷猎。我们使用了15年的战利品狩猎和偷猎非洲象(Loxodonta africana),狮子(Panthera leo),开普敦水牛(Syncerus caffer),普通斑马(Equus quagga),河马(Common Hippotamus amphibious)和大kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros)在坦桑尼亚的Selous和Rungwa野生动物保护区。结果表明,除非洲象外,没有证据表明管制狩猎对所有物种的偷猎率有影响。由于《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》(CITES)规定的配额数量有限以及国际自然保护联盟(IUCN)对大象狩猎的国际限制,非洲象的偷猎率高于管制狩猎率。该研究表明,由于偷猎事件的增加而停止战利品狩猎的争论没有实证依据。因此,应该在反偷猎活动上作出更多努力,确保遵守合法的狩猎条例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Insights of Legal and illegal wildlife hunting in Selous and Rungwa Game Reserves in the South-East and Central Tanzania
There is a lack of consensus among conservationists regarding the association between trophy hunting and wildlife poaching. Anti-hunting groups argue that trophy hunting is against animal welfare and contributes to wildlife population decline so it must be refuted. On the other hand, pro-hunting groups for advocate regulated hunting as an essential tool for supporting habitat protection and reducing crimes. Regulated hunting creates incentives for conservation through direct and indirect methods and reduces wildlife poaching in areas where ecotourism cannot be practically viable. We used fifteen years' trophy hunting and poaching of African elephant (Loxodonta africana), lion (Panthera leo), Cape buffalo (Syncerus caffer), Common Zebra (Equus quagga), hippopotamus (Common Hippotamus amphibious) and Greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) from Selous and Rungwa game reserves in Tanzania. The results showed that there is no evidence of influence of regulated hunting on poaching rate for all species with exception of African elephant. Poaching rate of African elephant was found to be higher than the rate of regulated hunting because of limited number of quota set by Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and international restriction of elephant hunting imposed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The study suggests that the contentions to stop trophy hunting because of an increase in poaching incidents have no empirical justification. Thus, more effort should be on anti-poaching activities ensuring the adherence to legal hunting regulations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信