A Low-Cost Manipulation of Food Resources Reduces Spatial Overlap Between Baboons (Papio ursinus) and Humans in Conflict

By B. Kaplan, M. O’Riain, R. Eeden, Andrew J. King. International journal of primatology, 2011

106 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Competition over food and space is a primary driver of human–wildlife conflict. In the Cape Peninsula, South Africa, chacma baboons (Papio ursinus) have adapted to a human-modified environment, sleeping on the urban edge and raiding anthropogenic food sources on a daily basis. Human monitors, who herd baboons away from residential areas, are currently the preferred method of conflict mitigation. However, this method is costly and suffers from short-term interruptions, wherein the unexpected absence of monitors may lead to unprepared residents using lethal force to deter raiding baboons. Elsewhere in the chacma baboon distribution (in nonconflict areas), artificial food patches have been shown to alter troop movements drastically by eliciting consistent leadership behavior from alpha males. We investigated whether an artificial patch could be used to draw baboons away from the urban environment in the absence of monitors. First, we introduced an artificial food patch into natural land within a troop’s range and monitored movement and activity patterns. Although the troop utilized the patch, there was not a significant decline in use of the urban space as they continued to favor food in urban waste sites. Maintaining the patch, we then restricted access to these waste sites using wire-mesh fencing and observed a significant reduction in the time the troop spent within the urban space. In both experimental phases we observed consistent leadership, with dominant individuals arriving first at the patch and monopolizing food items thereon. Thus, we recommend the combined strategy of reducing raiding incentives in conjunction with provisioning as a short-term, cost-effective strategy to alter a baboon troop’s movement patterns and raiding frequency.

Subfields: Ecology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/97289d0418846e56e610526288922014cf6df111

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Ecological and evolutionary implications of food subsidies from humans. (2013, background): “Subsidised food can be used to redistribute species, diminishing human-wildlife conflicts (Sahlsten et al. 2010; Kaplan et al. 2011; Martínez-Abraín et al. 2012).”
Foraging ecology of black bears in urban environments: guidance for human‐bear conflict mitigation (2015, background): “Similarly, better securing of anthropogenic foods from baboons (Papio ursinus) in the Cape Peninsula, South Africa, caused a shift from use of anthropogenic foods to other food sources (Kaplan et al. 2011).”