Black rhinoceros avoidance of tourist infrastructure and activity: planning and managing for coexistence
Date
2019-09-26
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Abstract
Wildlife-based tourism has been described as a key conservation mechanism (Buckley & Castley, Reference Buckley and Castley2012; Coghlan et al., Reference Coghlan, Buckley and Weaver2012; Buckley et al., Reference Buckley, Morrison and Castley2016) and has increased globally (Tapper, Reference Tapper2006), particularly in developing countries (Balmford et al., Reference Balmford, Beresford, Green, Naidoo, Walpole and Manica2009). However, such tourism can have negative consequences for the wildlife intended to benefit from it. For example, previous studies found the mountain caribou Rangifer tarandus is displaced from preferred habitat by snowmobiles (Seip et al., Reference Seip, Johnson and Watts2007) and the Asian rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis by elephant-borne tourists (Lott & Mccoy, Reference Lott and Mccoy1995). Declines in bottlenose dolphin Tursiops sp. abundance linked to tourism (Bejder et al., Reference Bejder, Samuels, Whitehead, Gales, Mann and Connor2006) and increased risks to human safety through habituation of brown bears Ursus arctos (Penteriani et al., Reference Penteriani, López-bao, Bettega, Dalerum, Delgado and Jerina2017) have also been reported. A growing demand for experiences that provide opportunities to interact directly and in close proximity with wildlife (Higham et al., Reference Higham, Bejder and Lusseau2009) has inspired research aiming to quantify the direct impacts of human–wildlife encounters (Buckley, Reference Buckley2011). However, human activity (including conservation-oriented tourism) occurring within wildlife habitat often creates so-called zones of influence in which certain wildlife species may be displaced from otherwise suitable habitat (Noss & Cue, Reference Noss and Cue2001; Taylor & Knight, Reference Taylor and Knight2003; Frair et al., Reference Frair, Merrill, Beyer and Morales2008; Polfus et al., Reference Polfus, Hebblewhite and Heinemeyer2011; Boulanger et al., Reference Boulanger, Poole, Gunn and Wierzchowski2012). Few studies have examined the indirect effects of tourism infrastructure and operational development on free-ranging wildlife. An incomplete understanding of the effects tourism has on wildlife can result in poor management planning (Buckley & Pabla, Reference Buckley and Pabla2012) and reduce the net positive outcomes for conservation (Buckley, Reference Buckley2010). Even when scientific data are available, evidence-based management approaches are not necessarily implemented because research is often not management-oriented (Linklater, Reference Linklater2003) or researchers do not plan for implementation of their findings (Knight et al., Reference Knight, Cowling, Rouget, Balmford, Lombard and Campbell2008). To ensure conservation benefits exceed the costs associated with increased tourism involving rare and threatened wildlife (Karanth & DeFries, Reference Karanth and DeFries2011), it is vital that research is translated into management approaches that are both useful and user-friendly (Pierce et al., Reference Pierce, Cowling, Knight, Lombard, Rouget and Wolf2005; Thirgood et al., Reference Thirgood, Mduma, Keyyu and Laurenson2007). The policy sciences provide both a theory and a practical framework for integrating evidence in an effective decision-making process (Clark, Reference Clark2002). This approach has been used to improve conservation for many threatened species including koalas (Clark et al., Reference Clark, Mazur, Begg and Cork2000), great apes (Eves et al., Reference Eves, Gordon, Stein and Clark2002) and brown bears (Rutherford et al., Reference Rutherford, Gibeau, Clark and Chamberlain2009). The Critically Endangered black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis, an iconic large African mammal that has experienced a 97% population decline since 1970 (Emslie & Brooks, Reference Emslie and Brooks1999) could also benefit from a management-oriented approach.
Description
CITATION: untifering, J., Linklater, W., Naidoo, R., !Uri-≠Khob, S., Du Preez, P., Beytell, P., . . . Knight, A. (2021). Black rhinoceros avoidance of tourist infrastructure and activity: Planning and managing for coexistence. Oryx, 55(1), 150-159. doi:10.1017/S0030605318001606
The original publication is available at: cambridge.org
The original publication is available at: cambridge.org
Keywords
Conservation tourism, Diceros bicornis, Disturbance, Ecotourism, Evidence-based management, Rhinoceros, Sustainable tourism, Zone of influence
Citation
untifering, J., Linklater, W., Naidoo, R., !Uri-≠Khob, S., Du Preez, P., Beytell, P., . . . Knight, A. (2021). Black rhinoceros avoidance of tourist infrastructure and activity: Planning and managing for coexistence. Oryx, 55(1), 150-159. doi:10.1017/S0030605318001606