• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

野生动物对农作物的损害和对牲畜的掠夺:来自印度南达维生物圈保护区的案例研究。

Crop damage and livestock depredation by wildlife: a case study from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, India.

作者信息

Rao K S, Maikhuri R K, Nautiyal S, Saxena K G

机构信息

G. B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development, Kosi-Katarmal, Almora 263 643, India.

出版信息

J Environ Manage. 2002 Nov;66(3):317-27. doi: 10.1006/jema.2002.0587.

DOI:10.1006/jema.2002.0587
PMID:12448409
Abstract

The success of conserving biological resources in any Biosphere Reserve or protected area depends on the extent of support and positive attitudes and perceptions of local people have towards such establishments. Ignoring the dependence of the local people for their subsistence needs on resources of such areas leads to conflicts between protected area managers and the local inhabitants. Crop yield losses and livestock depredation were serious problems observed in most buffer zone villages of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve. In the present study 10 villages situated in the buffer zone of Nanada Devi Biosphere Reserve (1612 km2 area) in Chamoli district of Uttaranchal, India were studied during 1996-97 using a questionnaire survey of each household (419 = households; 2253 = total population in 1991; 273 ha = cultivated area). Estimates of crop yield losses were made using paired plots technique in four representative villages for each crop species. The magnitude of crop yield losses varied significantly with the distance of agricultural field from forest boundary. The total crop yield losses were high for wheat and potato in all the villages. The spatial distribution of total crop yield losses in any village indicated that they were highest in the area near to forest and least in the area near to village for all crops. Losses from areas near to forest contributed to more than 50% of total losses for each crop in all villages. However, in Lata, Peng and Tolma villages, the losses are high for kidney bean and chemmi (local variety of kidney bean) which varied between 18.5% to 30% of total losses in those villages. Potato alone represents 43.6% of total crop yield loss due to wildlife in Dronagiri village in monetary terms. Among the crops, the monetary value of yield losses are least for amaranth and highest for kidney bean. The projected total value of crop yield losses due to wildlife damage for buffer zone villages located in Garhwal Himalaya is about Rs. 538,620 (US$ 15,389). Besides food grains, horticultural crops i.e. apple, also suffered maximum damage. Major wildlife agents responsible for crop damage were wild boar, bear, porcupine, monkey, musk deer and partridge (chokor). Monkey and wild boar alone accounted for about 50% to 60% of total crop damage in the study villages. Goat and sheep are the major livestock killed by leopard. The total value of livestock losses at prevailing market rates is about Rs. 1,024,520 (US$ 29,272) in the study villages. Due to existing conservation policies and laxity in implementation of preventive measures, the problems for local inhabitants are increasing. Potential solutions discussed emphasize the need to undertake suitable and appropriate protective measures to minimize the crop losses. Change in cropping and crop composition, particularly cultivation of medicinal plants (high value low volume crops), were also suggested. Besides, fair and quick disbursement of compensation for crop loss and livestock killing need to be adopted. Local people of the buffer zone area already have a negative attitude towards park/reserve establishment due to socio-political changes inducing major economic losses and this attitude may lead to clashes and confrontations if proper ameliorative measures are not taken immediately.

摘要

在任何生物圈保护区或保护区内,保护生物资源的成功与否取决于当地居民对这些机构的支持程度以及积极的态度和看法。忽视当地居民的生存需求对这些地区资源的依赖,会导致保护区管理者与当地居民之间产生冲突。在南达德维生物圈保护区的大多数缓冲区村庄,作物产量损失和牲畜捕食是严重问题。在本研究中,1996 - 1997年期间,对印度北阿坎德邦查莫利区南达德维生物圈保护区(面积1612平方公里)缓冲区的10个村庄进行了研究,采用对每户进行问卷调查的方式(1991年有419户家庭;总人口2253人;耕地面积273公顷)。对于每种作物,在四个代表性村庄使用配对地块技术估算作物产量损失。作物产量损失的程度因农田与森林边界的距离而有显著差异。所有村庄中小麦和土豆的总作物产量损失都很高。任何村庄总作物产量损失的空间分布表明,所有作物在靠近森林的区域损失最高,在靠近村庄的区域损失最小。靠近森林区域的损失占所有村庄每种作物总损失的50%以上。然而,在拉塔、彭和托尔马村,菜豆和切米(当地菜豆品种)的损失很高,占这些村庄总损失的18.5%至30%。就货币价值而言,仅土豆在德罗纳吉里村就占因野生动物造成的总作物产量损失的43.6%。在这些作物中,产量损失的货币价值苋菜最少,菜豆最高。预计加瓦尔喜马拉雅地区缓冲区村庄因野生动物破坏造成的作物产量损失总价值约为538,620卢比(15,389美元)。除了粮食作物,园艺作物如苹果也遭受了最大损失。造成作物损害的主要野生动物有野猪、熊、豪猪、猴子、麝鹿和鹧鸪(乔科尔)。仅猴子和野猪就占研究村庄作物总损害的约50%至

相似文献

1
Crop damage and livestock depredation by wildlife: a case study from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, India.野生动物对农作物的损害和对牲畜的掠夺:来自印度南达维生物圈保护区的案例研究。
J Environ Manage. 2002 Nov;66(3):317-27. doi: 10.1006/jema.2002.0587.
2
Living amidst large wildlife: livestock and crop depredation by large mammals in the interior villages of Bhadra Tiger Reserve, South India.生活在大型野生动物中间:印度南部巴德拉老虎保护区内陆村庄大型哺乳动物对牲畜和庄稼的掠夺。
Environ Manage. 2003 Apr;31(4):466-75. doi: 10.1007/s00267-002-2790-8.
3
Spatio-temporal patterns of attacks on human and economic losses from wildlife in Chitwan National Park, Nepal.尼泊尔奇特万国家公园内野生动物袭击人类和造成经济损失的时空模式。
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 19;13(4):e0195373. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195373. eCollection 2018.
4
Assessing patterns of human-wildlife conflicts and compensation around a Central Indian protected area.评估印度中部一个保护区周围的人与野生动物冲突和补偿模式。
PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50433. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050433. Epub 2012 Dec 5.
5
Living with wildlife and mitigating conflicts around three Indian protected areas.与野生动物共存并缓解三个印度自然保护区周边的冲突。
Environ Manage. 2013 Dec;52(6):1320-32. doi: 10.1007/s00267-013-0162-1. Epub 2013 Sep 13.
6
Livestock predation, crop raiding, and community attitudes towards sustainable wildlife conservation in and around Mankira Forest, Southwest Ethiopia.牲畜捕食、作物掠夺以及社区对埃塞俄比亚西南部曼基拉森林及周边地区可持续野生动物保护的态度。
BMC Ecol Evol. 2024 Jun 27;24(1):85. doi: 10.1186/s12862-024-02279-2.
7
Carnivore-caused livestock mortality in Trans-Himalaya.喜马拉雅山脉地区食肉动物导致的牲畜死亡情况
Environ Manage. 2007 Apr;39(4):490-6. doi: 10.1007/s00267-005-0178-2.
8
Local residents perception of benefits and losses from protected areas in India and Nepal.印度和尼泊尔当地居民对保护区的得失感知。
Environ Manage. 2012 Feb;49(2):372-86. doi: 10.1007/s00267-011-9778-1. Epub 2011 Nov 13.
9
Wild leafy vegetables: a study of their subsistence dietetic support to the inhabitants of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, India.野生叶菜类蔬菜:对印度楠达德维生物圈保护区居民生存饮食支持的研究。
J Ethnobiol Ethnomed. 2008 May 30;4:15. doi: 10.1186/1746-4269-4-15.
10
Patterns of human-wildlife conflict and compensation practices around Daxueshan Nature Reserve, China.中国大雪山东部自然保护区的人与野生动物冲突模式及补偿实践。
Zool Res. 2018 Nov 18;39(6):406-412. doi: 10.24272/j.issn.2095-8137.2018.056. Epub 2018 May 31.

引用本文的文献

1
Externalities in wild pig damages on U.S. crop and livestock farms: The role of landowner actions and landscape heterogeneity.野猪对美国农作物和畜牧场造成损害的外部性:土地所有者行为和景观异质性的作用。
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 10;20(4):e0320316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0320316. eCollection 2025.
2
Wildlife habitat mapping using Sentinel-2 imagery of Mehao Wildlife Sanctuary, Arunachal Pradesh, India.利用印度阿鲁纳恰尔邦梅豪野生动物保护区的哨兵2号影像进行野生动物栖息地绘图。
Heliyon. 2023 Feb 20;9(3):e13799. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13799. eCollection 2023 Mar.
3
Coincidence of low genetic diversity and increasing population size in wild gaur populations in the Khao Phaeng Ma Non-Hunting Area, Thailand: A challenge for conservation management under human-wildlife conflict.
在泰国考艾彭丁非狩猎区,野生野牛种群的遗传多样性低与种群数量增加相巧合:人类与野生动物冲突下保护管理的挑战。
PLoS One. 2022 Aug 30;17(8):e0273731. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273731. eCollection 2022.
4
The rhesus macaque as a success story of the Anthropocene.恒河猴是人类世的成功案例。
Elife. 2022 Jul 8;11:e78169. doi: 10.7554/eLife.78169.
5
Gender attitude towards environmental protection: a comparative survey during COVID-19 lockdown situation.性别对环境保护的态度:新冠疫情封锁期间的一项比较调查
Environ Dev Sustain. 2022;24(12):13841-13886. doi: 10.1007/s10668-021-02015-6. Epub 2022 Jan 13.
6
Human-wildlife conflict in the roof of the world: Understanding multidimensional perspectives through a systematic review.世界屋脊上的人类与野生动物冲突:通过系统综述理解多维视角。
Ecol Evol. 2021 Aug 2;11(17):11569-11586. doi: 10.1002/ece3.7980. eCollection 2021 Sep.
7
Reconciling farming and wild nature: Integrating human-wildlife coexistence into the land-sharing and land-sparing framework.协调农业与野生自然:将人-野生动物共存纳入土地共享和土地保护框架。
Ambio. 2019 Feb;48(2):131-138. doi: 10.1007/s13280-018-1059-2. Epub 2018 May 11.
8
The monkey is not always a God: Attitudinal differences toward crop-raiding macaques and why it matters for conflict mitigation.猴子并非总是神灵:对庄稼偷盗猕猴的态度差异及其对缓解冲突的意义。
Ambio. 2018 Oct;47(6):711-720. doi: 10.1007/s13280-017-1008-5. Epub 2018 Jan 13.
9
Farm crops depredation by European bison (Bison bonasus) in the vicinity of forest habitats in northeastern Poland.农田作物遭欧洲野牛(Bison bonasus)破坏的情况,在波兰东北部靠近森林栖息地的地区时有发生。
Environ Manage. 2012 Oct;50(4):530-41. doi: 10.1007/s00267-012-9913-7. Epub 2012 Jul 28.
10
Compensation payments for downsides generated by protected areas.保护区负面影响的补偿支付。
Ambio. 2013 Feb;42(1):90-9. doi: 10.1007/s13280-012-0330-1. Epub 2012 Jul 6.