
Back to Index of Primate reports
AN ASSESSMENT OF CROP-RAIDING BY MACACA OCHREATA BRUNNESCENS IN BUTON, SOUTHEAST SULAWESI: FARMERS’
PERCEPTIONS, REALITY AND THE IMPACT ON PRIMATE BEHAVIOUR AND CONSERVATION
Aim
To assess the levels of damage to crops by
macaques, compare this to farmers perceptions of damage levels and investigate
methods of deterrence.
Objectives
To
determine the degree of damage attributed to monkeys by local farmers and to
assess farmers’ attitudes towards the monkeys.
To determine the actual levels of damage inflicted on the crops by the
monkeys and compare these to the perceived levels.
To
investigate the impacts of crop raiding on the macaques’ behaviour.
To
investigate ways of deterring the monkeys from the crops and develop
suitable management plans.
Introduction
This study will assess the
degree to which the booted Sulawesi macaque poses a threat to farmers’
livelihoods and, in turn, how this affects farmers’ perceptions of a
threatened species. Human attitudes directly affect the conservation of this
sub-species and this project will initially determine attitudes and ultimately
create a suitable management strategy for the primates.
The human perception of
primates is often one of contradiction, typified by extremes. Whilst for many
cultures primates are a symbol of religion and are sacred e.g. Hindus of India,
in others such as Japan, they are mythical creatures viewed as cunning and
devious. However for most of the world’s subsistence and plantation farmers
living in close proximity to these animals, they are a significant crop pest. In
many cultures these views overlap resulting in both a love and loathing of them
such that they may be worshipped at a temple but shot on the field next door.
Cultural tolerance alone is protecting many species of primate, but as this
begins to wane in the face of increasing human populations, demographic
movements and habitat destruction, it is vital that the conflict that exists be
understood. Conservation depends on local perceptions, economy and social
factors and it is within these limitations that it must work and against this
background that this project has been set.
Human-wildlife
conflict
Human-wildlife conflict is of
increasing concern in all parts of the world and has been the focus of recent
conservation efforts (see for example Bell 1984; Else and Lee 1986; Hill 1998,
Hoare 2000, Infield 1988, Naughton Treves 1998; Newmark et al, 1994). (see for
example Bell 1984; Else and Lee 1986; Hill 1998; Hoare 2000; Infield 1988;
Naughton Treves 1998; Newmark et al. 1994). With increasing human populations,
especially in the developing world, more human and wildlife populations are
coming into direct competition (Eudey 1986; Strum 1987a, b, 1994; Tchamba 1996).
In subsistence agricultural
societies the nuisance value of wildlife, from crop damage and livestock
depredation, is often pronounced in people’s minds (Ranjitsinh 1984). People
feel threatened by wildlife, both in terms of crop loss and personal safety (Eley
and Else 1984; Hill 1999; Malic and Johnson 1994; Priston 2001). Such losses can
be enormous, both in direct economic terms and through indirect costs on time
and energy devoted to protection and re-planting after damage (Hill 1998, 1999),
as well as the cost of potential conflicts between activities and less time to
complete other work. (Lee and Priston submitted). Estimates of damage reach 90%
in some areas (Mishra 1984), representing an annual value of $500 per farmer
which, though of little national importance, causes the individual farmer much
suffering (Barnes 1996).
Primates
as Pests
Primates dominate amongst
pests that damage crops, particularly around African and Asian reserves, being
responsible for over 70% of the damage events and 50% of the area damaged (Naughton
Treves 1998). Because of their intelligence, opportunism, adaptability and
manipulative abilities some species can easily turn to crop foraging and make
formidable crop-raiders. The human and non-human primate niches overlap
extensively making competition much higher between the two and posing many
management problems (Strum 1987a).
One fundamental factor is the
cultural attitude of people towards primates. Levels of tolerance, acceptance
and even demand for interactions vary with cultural context (Biquand et al.
1992; Gautier and Biquand 1994). For Hindus the monkey is sacred and in parts of
Northern India, Indonesia and other areas, they are worshipped, protected and
provisioned by the villagers. Whilst showing remarkable tolerance, people are
understandably still reluctant to share their crops (Eudey 1994; Malic and
Johnson 1994; Southwick et al. 1961a, b; Strum and Southwick 1986).
Traditional methods to prevent
primate crop-raiding have limited success. The dexterity, deceptive skills, and
intelligence of some primates make containment and control costly, inefficient
and ultimately ineffective (Maples et al. 1976; Strum 1986, 1987a, 1994).
Indonesia has the fifth
largest human population in the world (Atmosoedarjo et al. 1984) and nowhere is
there a greater variety and diversity of primates than in South and Southeast
Asia (Roonwal and Mohnot 1977). Sulawesi itself is one of the most distinctive
islands with 127 indigenous mammals, 79 of which are endemic (Whitten et al.
1988). Legal protection of species and forested land is poor. As with almost
every other primate species, the Sulawesi macaques are facing loss of habitat
due to subsistence farming and logging, as well as subsistence hunting and
“pest” control measures in some areas (O'Brien and Kinnaird 1997; Rosenbaum
et al. 1998). Macaques are adaptable and opportunistic and thus can cope with
these problems better than some species (Richard et al. 1989), but even within
Sulawesi population declines of 75% have been witnessed (Macaca nigra) (Rosenbaum et al. 1998). An understanding of their
foraging behaviour is essential to the formation of a suitable management
strategy.
Why
study attitudes?
Information about the
attitudes and perceptions of villagers towards the pest-monkeys is a
prerequisite to designing optimal and effective management schemes (Else and Lee
1986; Gillingham and Lee 1999; Parry and Campbell 1992; Pirta et al. 1997). In
the past attempts to deal with problems have run into severe difficulties due to
lack of local consultation (Strum 1987a).
For the farmers, the extent of
economic loss due to primates may be less important than the belief that monkeys
are responsible. As a result primate populations may be persecuted. Also if they
believe primates to be responsible then they may not take action against other
animals which could be causing significant damage, therefore losing even more of
their crop. It is necessary to investigate attitudes towards primate pests, as
well as the reality of their raiding actions to determine the extent of any
mismatch between these perceptions and reality.
Conclusion
Local
perceptions of this endangered sub-species could pose a major threat to its
conservation. This study will assess the nature of the attitudes held by local
farmers and work to create a suitable and appropriate management scheme for pest
primates. It will also work to alter any negative perceptions through local
education programmes already in place and by working closely with the local
community elders and forest rangers. Reports will be produced for both local and
national government.
These
primates are currently classified as vulnerable (IUCN). However no detailed
surveys have been carried out on the island. With increasing human pressure on
land and arrival of transmigrants from other islands, it is likely that
human-macaque conflict will only increase. Action must be taken now to pre-empt
the inevitable decline of this species. One approach is to assess the extent of
the problem monkeys pose to the local communities and to assess human attitudes
in response. By working within the context of attitudes and perceptions, and by
providing effective defensive strategies, it is hoped that conflict can be
minimised.
Methods
Semi-structured
interviews with local farmers (open and fixed response questions) in 4
villages (Kawelli, La Bundo Bundo, Wakangka and Wakalambe)
Estimates
of amount of primate crop damage using random stratified transect sampling
in fields following interviews (as well as general farm measurements such as
area, distance from forest, crop types etc).
Scan
sampling observational study of one habituated and known crop-raiding troop.
Focal
Farm Surveys in 7 Farms in Kawelli. Monitored one day a week on a rotational
basis. Recording frequency, duration and number of participants of raids as
well as scan sampling every 2 minutes and recording behaviour.
Initial Results
148 Interviews have been
conducted with farmers in the 4 villages. Approximately 25% of these have been
with Hindu farmers whilst the rest are with Muslim farmers. Initial examination
of the results (which are yet to be analysed properly) suggests that Hindu
farmers experience less crop loss from Primates, owing to the fact that most are
wet-rice farmers (a crop primates do not raid frequently). Hence Hindu
farmers’ perceptions of the macaque are generally more positive than Muslim
farmers. However farmers who had had any experience with primates raiding farms
in the past or who also owned plantation crops e.g. cocoa were more negative
about them.
The worst pests reported were
pigs, monkeys and rats. The most successful deterrent methods cited were
guarding the farm and shouting, chasing or throwing stones. Though farmers
complained that this meant they had to stay in their farms all day and were
unable to do other activities and earn money elsewhere. There were also
instances of children being unable to attend school because they had to guard
the farms. There was confusion over the law surrounding what methods of
deterrence are permitted e.g. traps and poison etc, but these were generally
thought to be unsuccessful methods. 2 Farmers reported altering their farming
practices and growing different plants (chilli and sawi vegetables) to prevent
monkey and pig raids. This requires more investigation and might possibly prove
to be a useful solution to the pest problem.
72
farms were mapped and surveyed for primate damage. Damage levels were greater in
farms closer to the forest edge and within farms damage was generally greater
closer to the fence. Crops most heavily damaged were sweet potato, banana and
corn; though this may be affected by what crops are actually available at the
time.
Focal
farm surveys have demonstrated that these crops are indeed raided more
frequently than others and chasing monkeys seems to be the most successful
method of preventing damage, though even this is not very successful as the
primates are not easily scared away.
Further
analysis is required to assess the extent of differences between farmers’
perceptions of raiding and the reality.
Final Report:
The above report constitutes summary of progress
towards completion of a thesis entitled An assessment of
crop-raiding by Macaca ochreata
brunnescens in Buton, Southeast Sulawesi: farmers’ perceptions, reality
and the impact on primate behaviour and conservation which will be
produced by Nancy Priston, University of Cambridge by September 2004.
References
Atmosoedarjo,
S., et al. (1984). National Parks and Rural Communities. National Parks,
Conservation and Development: The Role of Protected Areas in Sustaining Society:
Proceedings of the World Congress on National Parks, Bali, Indonesia 11-22
October 1982. J. Mackinnon. Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution Press:
237 - 244.
Barnes,
R. F. W. (1996). "The Conflict Between Humans and Elephants in the Central
African Forests." Mammal Review 26(2/3): 67 - 80.
Bell,
R. H. V. (1984). The Man-Animal interface: An Assessment of Crop-Damage and
Wildlife Control. Conservation and Wildlife Management in Africa: The
Proceeding of a Workshop Organised by the US Peace Corps at Kasungu National
Park, Malawi. E. McShane-Caluzi, US Peace Corps:
387 - 416.
Biquand,
S., et al. (1992). "The Distribution of Papio hamadryas in Saudi Arabia:
Ecological Correlates and Human Influence." International Journal of
Primatology 13(3): 223 - 243.
Eley,
D. and J. G. Else (1984). "Primate Pest Problems in Kenya Hotels and
Lodges." International Journal of Primatology 5(4): 334.
Else,
J. G. and P. C. Lee (1986). Primate-Human Conflict. Primate Ecology and
Conservation: Vol. 2 of Selected Proceedings of the Tenth Congress of the
International Primatological Society. P. C. Lee. New York, Cambridge
University Press. 2: 213 - 214.
Eudey,
A. A. (1986). Hill Tribe peoples and Primate Conservation in Thailand: a
Preliminary Assessment of the Problem of Reconciling Shifting Cultivation
Objectives. Primate Ecology and Conservation: Vol. 2 of Selected Proceedings
of the Tenth Congress of the International Primatological Society. P. C.
Lee. New York, Cambridge University Press. 2:
237 - 248.
Eudey,
A. A. (1994). "Temple and Pet Primates in Thailand." Revue
D'Ecologie (Terre & Vie) 49(3):
273 - 280.
Gautier,
J.-P. and S. Biquand (1994). "Primate Commensalism." Revue
D'Ecologie (Terre & Vie) 49(3):
210 - 212.
Gillingham,
S. and P. C. Lee (1999). "The Impact of wildlife-related benefits on the
conservation attitudes of local people around the Selous Game Reserve,
Tanzania." Environmental Conservation 26(3): 218 - 228.
Hill,
C. M. (1998). "Conflicting Attitudes Towards Elephants Around the Budungo
Forest Reserve, Uganda." Environmental Conservation 25(3): 244 - 250.
Hill,
C. M. (1999). "Conflict of Interest Between People and Baboons: Crop
Raiding in Uganda,." International Journal of Primatology 21(2): 299 - 315.
Hoare,
R. (2000). "African Elephants and Humans in Conflict: the Outlook for
Co-existence." Oryx 34(1):
34 - 38.
Infield,
M. (1988). "Attitudes of a Rural Community towards Conservation and a local
Conservation Area in Natal, South Africa." Biological Conservation 45:
21 - 46.
Lee,
P. C. and N. E. C. Priston (submitted). Perceptions of Pests: Human Attitudes to
Primates, Conflict and Consequences for Conservation. Commensalism and
Conflict: The Primate-Human Interface. J. D. Paterson. Winnipeg, Manitoba,
Hignell Printing.
Malic,
I. and R. L. Johnson (1994). "Commensal Rhesus in India: The Need and Cost
of Translocation." Revue D'Ecologie (Terre & Vie) 49(3):
233 - 244.
Maples,
W. R., et al. (1976). "Adaptations of Crop-raiding Baboons in Kenya." American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 45:
309 - 316.
Mishra,
H. R. (1984). A Delicate Balance: Tigers, Rhinoceros, Tourists and Park
Management vs the Needs of the Local People in Royal Chitwan National Park,
Nepal. National Parks, Conservation and Development: The Role of Protected
Areas in Sustaining Society: Proceedings of the World Congress on National
Parks, Bali, Indonesia 11-22 October 1982. K. R. Miller. Washington D.C.,
Smithsonian Institution Press: 197 -
205.
Naughton
Treves, L. (1998). "Temporal Patterns of Crop-raiding by Primates: Linking
Food Availability in Croplands and Adjacent Forest." Journal of Applied
Ecology 35: 596 - 606.
Newmark,
W. D., et al. (1994). "The Conflict between Wildlife and Local People
Living adjacent to Protected areas in Tanzania: Human Density as a
predictor." Conservation Biology 8(1):
249 - 255.
O'Brien,
T. G. and M. Kinnaird (1997). "Behaviour, Diet, and Movements of the
Sulawesi Crested Black Macaque (Macaca
nigra)." International Journal of Primatology 18: 321 - 351.
Parry,
D. and B. Campbell (1992). "Attitudes of Rural Communities to Animal
Wildlife and Its Utilization in Chobe Enclave and Mababe Depression,
Botswana." Environmental Conservation 19(3):
245 - 252.
Pirta,
R. S., et al. (1997). "The Management of the Rhesus Monkey Macaca mulatta and Hanuman Langur Presbytis entellus in Himachal Pradesh, India." Biological
Conservation 79: 97 - 106.
Priston,
N. E. C. (2001). Assessment of Crop Damage by
Macaca ochreata brunnescens in Southeast Sulawesis - a Farmer's Perspective.
Department of Biological Anthropology. Cambridge, England, University of
Cambridge: 109.
Ranjitsinh,
M. K. (1984). Keynote Address: The Indomalayan Realm. National Parks,
Conservation and Development: The Role of Protected Areas in Sustaining Society:
Proceedings of the World Congress on National Parks, Bali, Indonesia 11-22
October 1982. K. R. Miller. Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution Press:
148 - 153.
Richard,
A. F., et al. (1989). "Weed Macaques: The Evolutionary Implications of
Macaque Feeding Ecology." International Journal of Primatology 10(6):
569 - 594.
Roonwal,
M. L. and S. M. Mohnot (1977). Primates of South Asia: Ecology, Sociobiology
and Behaviour. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.
Rosenbaum,
B., et al. (1998). "Population Densities of Sulawesi Crested Black Macaques
(Macaca nigra) on Bacan and Sulawesi,
Indonesia: Effects of Habitat Disturbance and Hunting." American Journal
of Primatology 44: 89 - 106.
Southwick,
C. H., et al. (1961a). "A Population Survey of Rhesus Monkeys in Northern
India: II Transportation Routes and Forest Areas." Ecology 42(4):
698 - 710.
Southwick,
C. H., et al. (1961b). "A Population Survey of Rhesus Monkeys in Villages,
Towns and Temples of Northern India." Ecology 42(3): 538 - 547.
Strum,
S. C. (1986). A Role for Long-term Primate Field Research in Source Countries. Primate
Ecology and Conservation: Vol. 2 of Selected Proceedings of the Tenth Congress
of the International Primatological Society. P. C. Lee. New York, Cambridge
Univeristy Press. 2: 215 - 220.
Strum,
S. C. (1987a). Almost Human: A Journey into the World of Baboons. New
York, Random House.
Strum,
S. C. (1987b). The Pumphouse Gang Moves to a Strange New Land. National
Geographic. 172: 552 - 601.
Strum,
S. C. (1994). "Prospects for Management of Primate Pests." Revue
D'Ecologie (Terre & Vie) 49(3):
295 - 306.
Strum,
S. C. and C. H. Southwick (1986). Translocation of Primates. Primates: The
Road to Self-sustaining Populations. K. Benirschke. New York, Springer-verlag
New York Incorporated: 949 - 957.
Tchamba,
M. N. (1996). "History and Present Status of the Human/Elephant Conflict in
the Waza-Logone Region, Cameroon, West Africa." Biological Conservation
75: 35 - 41.
Whitten,
A. J., et al. (1988). The Ecology of Sulawesi. Indonesia, Gadjah Mada
University Press.