Livestock-wildlife interactions: key aspects for reconnecting animal production and wildlife conservation

被引:0
|
作者
Cravino, Alexandra [1 ]
Perello, Alberto [2 ]
Brazeiro, Alejandro [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Republica, Fac Ciencias, Grp Biodivers & Ecol Conservac, Inst Ecol & Ciencias Ambientales, Montevideo, Uruguay
[2] SbioTec Spin Off, SL Edificio Incubadora Empresas UCLM Camino De Mol, Ciudad Real 13071, Spain
关键词
habitat heterogeneity; livestock; stocking rate; wildlife; win-win outcomes; ECOLOGY;
D O I
10.1093/af/vfad069
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
• Human population growth has brought an increase in food, water, and land demands, as a result of which livestock production is increasing, with significant consequences for wildlife. • Livestock production negatively impacts wildlife when it implies completely substituting native ecosystems for pasturelands; when it occurs on native grasslands or even partially modified savannas, the impacts on wildlife are usually minor but highly dependent on stocking rate and management. • Livestock production can reduce the abundance and alter the behavior of some wild species and even lead to their extinction at a local level by changing the vegetation structure and promoting a high presence of dogs and humans. The new environmental conditions that livestock generate could, nevertheless, favor some species. • To benefit wildlife and sustainable production, livestock breeders should adjust stocking rates to intermediate levels to avoid severe soil and vegetation degradation and should opportunely rotate the herd between paddocks to generate heterogeneous landscapes. • Conservationists and rangeland managers should promote dialogue among livestock breeders and scientists to find sustainable alternatives to favor wildlife, such as developing market distinctions and governmental support for good practices, with win-win outcomes. Copyright © 2024 American Society of Animal Science.
引用
收藏
页码:13 / 19
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Perception and attitude of pastoralists on livestock-wildlife interactions around Awash National Park, Ethiopia: implication for biodiversity conservation
    Biru, Yihew
    Tessema, Zewdu K.
    Urge, Mengistu
    ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2017, 6
  • [2] Pathogen Exposure in Cattle at the Livestock-Wildlife Interface
    Rajeev, Malavika
    Mutinda, Mathew
    Ezenwa, Vanessa O.
    ECOHEALTH, 2017, 14 (03) : 542 - 551
  • [3] Pathogen Exposure in Cattle at the Livestock-Wildlife Interface
    Malavika Rajeev
    Mathew Mutinda
    Vanessa O. Ezenwa
    EcoHealth, 2017, 14 : 542 - 551
  • [4] Perception and attitude of pastoralists on livestock-wildlife interactions around Awash National Park, Ethiopia: implication for biodiversity conservation
    Yihew Biru
    Zewdu K. Tessema
    Mengistu Urge
    Ecological Processes, 6
  • [5] Reported livestock guarding dog-wildlife interactions: Implications for conservation and animal welfare
    Whitehouse-Tedd, K.
    Wilkes, R.
    Stannard, C.
    Wettlaufer, D.
    Cilliers, D.
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2020, 241
  • [6] Editorial: Climate and Parasite Transmission at the Livestock-Wildlife Interface
    Babayani, Nlingisisi D.
    Rose Vineer, Hannah
    Walker, Josephine G.
    Davidson, Rebecca K.
    FRONTIERS IN VETERINARY SCIENCE, 2022, 8
  • [8] Competitive exclusion and herbivore management in a context of livestock-wildlife conflict
    Marino, Andrea
    Rodriguez, Victoria
    AUSTRAL ECOLOGY, 2022, 47 (06) : 1208 - 1221
  • [9] Diseases at the livestOck-wildlife interface: Status, challenges, and opportunities in the United States
    Miller, Ryan S.
    Farnsworth, Matthew L.
    Malmberg, Jennifer L.
    PREVENTIVE VETERINARY MEDICINE, 2013, 110 (02) : 119 - 132
  • [10] Brucellosis and chlamydiosis seroprevalence in goats at livestock-wildlife interface areas of Zimbabwe
    Bhandi, Solomon
    Pfukenyi, Davies M.
    Matope, Gift
    Murondoti, Absolom
    Tivapasi, Musavengana
    Ndengu, Masimba
    Scacchia, Massimo
    Bonfini, Barbara
    de Garine-Wichatitsky, Michel
    ONDERSTEPOORT JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH, 2019, 86 (01)