Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus)- Data, Pictures & Videos

[Acinonyx sp.]

Spatial ecology of free-ranging cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) and its applications to mitigate the farmer-cheetah conflict in Namibia

Abstract:
The global distribution of the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) has decreased dramatically during the past decades. Cheetahs are currently confined to only 9% of their former range. Approximately 77% of the cheetah range lies outside protected areas, frequently exposing cheetahs to conflict with people. Southern Africa represents with approximately 4,000 individuals the stronghold of the global cheetah population which comprises approximately 7,100 individuals. Namibia hosts approximately 1,500 individuals, which together with the cheetahs in Botswana form the largest connected population worldwide. This population is threatened because most of these cheetahs roam on livestock farms and are persecuted by farmers. From a conservation point of view it is therefore of utmost importance to develop non-lethal mitigation strategies to reduce this long-lasting farmer-cheetah conflict. This dissertation thesis was conducted to use long-term data of the Cheetah Research Project (CRP) of the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW) in Berlin, Germany, to develop and test such a mitigation strategy in Namibia. In chapter 5 (publication one), I investigated the socio-spatial organization of free-ranging cheetahs on commercial farmland in central Namibia. Although cheetahs have been studied in several areas in the world for decades, their socio-spatial organization had not yet been clarified. The most comprehensive study was conducted in the 1990s in the Serengeti National Park (NP) in Tanzania and described a unique social organisation in mammals. Adult males either defended small territories separated from each other by some distance or roamed in large home ranges that encompassed several territories. The latter males are termed “floaters” and regularly visited the territories within their home ranges. Females also roamed in large home ranges which encompassed several territories but stayed mainly in the area between territories. Both territory holders and floaters can be solitary or occur in coalitions of two to three males. Subsequent studies elsewhere did not recognise such socio-spatial organization because of the method by which they categorized the individuals for data analysis. In this chapter I analysed the movement data of 133 males and 31 females to demonstrate that the socio-spatial organization of cheetahs described in the Serengeti NP also exists in Namibia. Several predictions were derived from the social organisation described for the Tanzanian cheetahs and tested with the data of the CRP. Consecutively I re-analysed published data of previous studies and could confirm the two tactics also in these datasets. Territory holder have preferred access to females, floaters heavily fight for territories, and the pattern can be found in all studies populations. Therefore I conclude, that this behavior may be a general trait of the species. In chapter 6 (publication two) we investigated the consequences of this spatial system for camera trap studies and capture-recapture models that estimate abundance and density of animal populations. Such models require high capture and recapture rates and a homogeneous detection probability of all individuals at camera trap stations. Capture and recapture rates were highest at the marking trees of territories, where territory holders frequently marked and which were regularly visited by floaters and irregularly visited by females. This meant that the detection probability at marking trees differed strongly between territory holders, floaters and females. Thus, the assumptions of most capture-recaptures models were violated in previous studies that provided abundance and density results of cheetahs by applying such techniques and are therefore likely to be biased. Chapter 6 tested the performance of four types of capture-recapture models whose assumptions permitted heterogeneity in the detection probability and compared the estimated abundance with the true abundance of cheetahs in the study area. This revealed two best suited models for the socio-spatial organization of cheetahs with one being favorable if spatial tactic is not known a priori. The results matched with the known abundances. On the basis of this information, I looked in chapter 7 (manuscript) at the local density and activity of cheetahs within the landscape and in relation to human-wildlife conflict and farm management. Some farms overlapped with a cheetah territory, others did not. The marking trees in the core area of cheetah territories had a substantially higher cheetah activity than other areas. We termed these core areas of the territories “cheetah communication hubs”, because they play an important role in the social system of cheetahs. From the perspective of the farmers, these hubs are local hotspots of predation risk for the cattle. We used an experimental approach to demonstrate that farmers who stationed their suckler cows and calves in such a hub suffered substantially higher losses of calves than farmers who had stationed their breeding herds far away from such a hub. This discovery was used to develop a livestock management plan for farmers overlapping with a cheetah hub. When their breeding herds were shifted away from the hub, their losses decreased substantially. This is because the hub did not shift, nor did the cheetahs conduct excursions to pursue and hunt the calves. Instead, they preyed on the local, naturally occurring wildlife prey. The mitigation strategy presented and tested here is therefore a highly effective and sustainable solution to reduce the farmer-cheetah conflict in Namibia and potentially also elsewhere.

https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/27339 Reply