Community Perceptions of Grivet Monkey Crop Depredation in the Ethiopian Highlands: Implications for Primate Conservation

Human–Wildlife Interactions 11(2):175–181, Fall 2017

Community perceptions of grivet monkey crop depredation in the Ethiopian Highlands: implications for primate conservation A˜ˌˑˊ˕ˎˠ A˕ˎ˕˒ː˗, Department of Animal, Rangeland and Wildlife Science, Mekelle University, P.O. Box 231, Mekelle, Ethiopia [email protected] Mˎˑˎ˛ˎ˝˞ Y˘˗ˊ˜, Department of Biology, P.O. Box 3102, Mekelle University, Mekelle, Ethiopia

Abstract: Human–primate confl icts in Africa have been increasing due to increased human population growth and the resulting competition for forest resources. The Ethiopian Highlands in northern Ethiopia, home to the grivet monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops), once consisted of large forested areas. This region has been severely denuded and now exhibits only small forest patches remaining at sites with special cultural signifi cance in the immediate vicinity of churches. These forest patches, surrounded by agricultural crops, provide refugia habitat for the grivet monkey. We randomly surveyed 50 villagers living near the Batiero Church Forest, a 45-ha forest patch located in northern Ethiopia, to determine villagers’ perceptions of the crop damage caused by the monkeys and mitigation measures to reduce crop loss. Most respondents expressed negative perceptions (74%) toward grivet monkeys, and 50% of respondents reported that crop damage was the most encountered problem in the study area. The perception of villagers to grivet monkeys diff ered based on farmland size (P = 0.00). To reduce crop damage, 53% of households used dogs to guard their farmland and 44% employed methods to physically scare or harass monkeys to protect their crops. At present, the villagers do not receive any government compensation for crop depredation. Thus, the villagers we surveyed wanted to eliminate the grivet monkey populations. This study provided insight into villager perception regarding human–primate confl icts that can impact primate conservation eff orts in other areas where human encroachment into primate habitats is increasing.

Key words: Chlorocebus aethiops, community perception, conservation, Ethiopia, grivet monkey, human–primate conﬂ ict, wildlife damage

Human–primate conflict has been a crops may be beaten, injured, and killed by the recurring problem in Africa due to increased local community (Peterson et al. 2010). Species human population and the resulting conservation depends on the interaction of social competition for forest resources (Hockings and and ecological factors; a bett er understanding of Sousa 2012). The conversions of primate forest the perceptions of local people toward wildlife is habitats to agricultural crops have impacted a prerequisite in designing species management primates and other wildlife through habitat and conservation strategies (Chauhan and Pirta loss and fragmentation (Baranga et al. 2012). 2010). Ecological factors include destruction Habitat destruction also decreases the amount of natural habitat, isolation of forest areas, and of available habitat, leading to restricted animal agricultural expansion (Ahsan and Uddin 2014). movement between habitable patches of land Social factors include changing knowledge, and decreasing gene fl ow between populations. att itudes, and traditional subsistence habits. Thus, inbreeding increases and genetic drift Increased human–primate confl icts may pose accelerates (Hockings and Sousa 2012). a conservation threat for primate populations. Extension deforestation of native trees that are Thus, the perception of local people toward the main food sources for primates and the planting natural resources and the eff ects of interaction of of commercial tree species that do not provide people should be studied (Sharma et al. 2011). food sources have also contributed to increased In Ethiopia, human–primate confl icts have primate crop depredation, further exacerbating been previously studied in Semien Mountains human–wildlife confl icts (Sillero-Zubiri and National Park where crop raiding by Gelada Switz er 2001, Ahsan and Uddin 2014). Primates baboons (Theropithecus gelada) seriously aff ects that destroy agricultural cereals, fruit, and farmers (Mesele et al. 2008, Mojo et al. 2014). 176 Human–Wildlife Interactions 11(2)

Mekonnen et al. (2012) reported that the the Batiero Church Forest, which has an area of conversion of primate habitats into agricultural 45 ha. It is situated in Atsibi, 65 km northeast land, near the Bale Mountains National Park, of Mekelle, the regional capital city of Tigray resulted in increased crop depredation by the Regional State. Bale monkey (Chlorocebus djamdjamensis) as Aschalew et al. (2017) counted 57 (density their native foods were replaced by agricultural ~1.3 ha-1) and 50 (density ~1.1 ha-1) grivet crops. Linkie et al. (2007) stated that crop monkeys in post-rainy season and dry season damage by wild animals can make communities in the forest, respectively. Because fi eld crops antagonistic and intolerant toward them, which contribute to a portion of the diet of the grivet may result in retaliation on the problem species. moneys in the post-rainy season, local farmers However, few studies have been conducted owning fi elds around the forest have expressed in northern Ethiopia where the confl ict may be concerns about crop depredation. severe due to a high rate of forest degradation There are a number of wild animals in and restriction of primates to patches of habitat Batiero Church Forest that coexist with the surrounded by agricultural fi elds. No published grivet monkey, including spott ed hyena paper is available about public perception (Crocuta crocuta), common duiker (Sylvicapra of human–primate confl ict in patch forests grimmia), common jackal (Canis aureus aureus), particularly for the grivet monkeys (Chlorocebus and common hare (Leporidae spp.). In addition, aethiops) in Ethiopia. the forest contains several species of rodents, We surveyed villagers in Batiero Church birds, amphibians, and snakes. The forest is Forest to assess their perceptions of crop predominantly composed of indigenous trees damage caused by the grivet monkey and the including the Family Cupressaceae (Juniperus mitigation measures to reduce crop loss. This procera), Family Fabaceae (Acacia sieberiana), study provided baseline information regarding and Family Sapindaceae (Dodonaea angustifolia). villager perception of human–primate confl icts The Family Myrtaceae (Eucalyptus spp.) was that could impact primate conservation eff orts planted in and around the study area to in areas where human encroachment into rehabilitate land degradation. primate habitats is increasing. Methods Study area We surveyed villagers living near the The study was conducted in Batiero Church Batiero Church Forest from December 2014 Forest in the Ethiopian Highlands, Eastern to September 2015 to assess their perceptions zone of Tigray, northern Ethiopia. The forest is about grivet monkeys. We randomly selected geographically located between 13°30’–13°45’N 50 respondents from 150 households located and 39°30’–39°45’ E. Altitude ranges from near the forest to conduct the study. Based 1,800–3,000 m above sea level. The average on our sampling design, a respondent was temperature of the area is 18°C. Rainfall is selected from every third household from an erratic but usually intense during July and alphabetized list. August, with an annual average of about The survey questionnaires included both 668 mm (Ethiopian National Meteorology open-ended and closed questions designed and Agency 2015). This region is severely denuded presented by the researcher. Interviews were typifi ed by patches of forest remaining at sites conducted with the assistance of a local guide. with special cultural signifi cance, such as the The average interview session was 30–45 min per immediate vicinity of churches (Aerts 2007). sampled household. All interviewed persons Local communities living near these forest were >18 years old. A series of supplementary patches use them to support their livelihood. questions was also used in the questionnaire to Human activities include fi rewood collection, gather personal and socioeconomic information grazing, and making farming tools. The at the level of individual respondents. expansion of neighboring farm fi elds continues We interviewed local communities about to encroach into the forest, reducing their size. grivet monkeys, their socioeconomic situation, We focused our study in adjacent villages and asked about their: 1) perceptions of overall around a forest patch commonly referred to as confl ict with grivet monkeys, 2) perceptions Grivet monkeys • Alelign and Yonas 177 of the extent of crop damage due to grivet and compared the signifi cant diff erence monkeys, 3) steps they took to mitigate losses, between variables by using a Chi-square test at and 4) interventions they prefer the government 95% confi dence interval. to take (culling, paying for damage). Results Data analysis Respondent demographics The data obtained from the surveys were Fifty percent of the respondents do not have analyzed by using (SPSS version 20.0). The a formal education, and the marital status of result was calculated using descriptive statistics the respondents showed that 70% were married

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of respondents, Batiero Church Forest, Ethiopian Highlands, Eastern zone of Tigray, northern Ethiopia, 2014–2015. Demographic characteristics Category Number Percent Age 18–30 years 15 30 30–40 years 15 30 >40 years 20 40 Sex Male 25 50 Female 25 50 Marital status Single 12 24 Married 35 70 Divorced 3 6 Education status No formal education 25 50 Primary education 15 30 Secondary education 10 20

Table 2. Household economy and activities of local community, Batiero Church Forest, Ethiopian Highlands, Eastern zone of Tigray, northern Ethiopia, 2014–2015. Factor Response Number Percent Farmland size <0.25 ha 12 24 0.25–1 ha 27 54 >1 ha 11 22 Crops grown Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) 18 36 Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) 7 14 Barley and bean (Vicia faba L.) 12 24 Pea (Pisum sativum L.) and lentil 8 16 (Lens culinaris Medikus) All crops listed 5 10 Crops produced <2.5 quintal 13 26 2.5–5 quintal 28 56 >5 quintal 8 16 Firewood collectiona Inside the study area 7 14 Other areas (out of the forest) 43 86

aThere is a regulation against gathering ﬁ rewood in the study area. If respondents collect ﬁ rewood from the forest, they will be punished by the local administrator. 178 Human–Wildlife Interactions 11(2)

Table 3. Community perceptions toward grivet monkeys (Chlorocebus aethiops) and crop damage, Batiero Church Forest, Ethiopian Highlands, Eastern zone of Tigray, northern Ethiopia, 2014–2015. Factor Response Number Percent Community perceptions Negative perception 37 74 Positive perception 13 26 Trends of crop damage Increased 35 70 Decreased 15 30 Severity of crop damage September 8 16 October 25 50 November 17 34

Table 4. Potential techniques or strategies used or recommended by survey respondents to mitigate grivet monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops) crop depredation, Batiero Church Forest, Ethiopian Highlands, Eastern zone of Tigray, northern Ethiopia, 2014–2015. Factor Response Number Percent Most eﬀ ective minimization methods of crop damage Scare away by human 22 44 Using dogs 26 52 Fencing the farmland 2 4 Community expectation from government to reduce Allowed to kill 15 30 crop damage Provide compensation 17 34 Relocate grivet monkeys 15 30 Don't know 3 6

(Table 1). The major economic activity of the L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), bean (Vicia people living around Batiero Church Forest faba L.), pea (Pisum sativum L.), and lentil (Lens was subsistence agriculture. Local communities culinaris Medikus) around the study area. collected fi rewood, with most respondents All respondents (100%) had no private (86%) collecting trees like Eucalyptus globules grazing land and wood plots. However, there is and catt le dung around their homes, while a communal grazing land for their catt le, which the remaining respondents (14%) collected they fed crop residuals and weeds from their indigenous plants including Juniperus in Batiero farmlands. The average crop production was Church Forest. 617 kg/ha around Batiero Church Forest but it The average land holding was 0.6 ha per varied according to the type of crops, and 36% household (Table 2). All respondents (100%) of respondents only grow wheat. reported that grivet monkeys damage crops in the fi elds, but they did not att ack people Community perception about grivet and have not been implicated in disease monkeys transmission to the local communities. The Most respondents (74%) had negative average crop damaged by grivet monkeys was perceptions toward grivet monkeys, and most estimated as 83.8 kg/ha per year but it varied respondents (70%) also reported the trend of according to the type of crops. Grivet monkeys crop damage by grivet monkeys increased in were reported by local people to feed on the last 5 years (Table 3). Villagers with smaller cultivated crops like wheat (Triticum aestivum farms expressed more negative att itudes Grivet monkeys • Alelign and Yonas 179 toward grivet monkeys (P = 0.00). Respondents crop raiders. As the amount of forest conversion used various methods to prevent crop raiding to agricultural farmlands increased, crops have by grivet monkeys, with 52% using dogs (Table become the main source of food for many non- 4). All villagers commonly used dogs to scare human primates (Baranga et al. 2012). away grivet monkeys from their farmland Grivet monkeys are opportunistic feeders before the monkeys raided their crops. in the forest and agricultural farmlands. All respondents (100%) reported they have Almost all primates are opportunistic feeders never received any kind of compensation for with enhanced intelligence and manipulative crops damaged by grivet monkeys. The local capabilities, and many are forest-edge species. communities reported that they would like to These feeding habits lead to confl ict with local take some measures to reduce crop damage by communities due to crop raiding (Naughton- grivet monkeys, including killing them (30%) Treves 1998). Thus, human–primate confl icts and requesting fi nancial compensation from were exacerbated in October and November the government (34%). because the crops reached maturity and harvesting stages, and grivet monkeys Discussion preferred to feed on the crops. Therefore, Most respondents expressed negative farmers may be forced to take severe measures att itudes toward grivet monkeys around on the animals, including killing the grivet Batiero Church Forest. According to Hill monkeys. Poor farmers who live in developing (2000), att itudes toward wildlife vary among countries cannot tolerate crop damage by wild rural agricultural producers. In communities animals because communities cannot get any with a subsistence economy, even small compensation for the damages (Linkie et al. losses can generate negative att itudes toward 2007). wildlife. The major economic activity of local The habitat of the grivet monkeys in Batiero communities around the church forest was Church Forest may already be too small to subsistence agriculture with small land size. sustain the current (Aschalew et al. 2017). The The income from their farmland was too small fate of the grivet monkey in our study area to sustain their livelihood. Hence, they were and others nearby is uncertain because their directly or indirectly dependent on the forest native habitat is surrounded by agricultural resources that were the main sources of food farmlands and human sett lements that may for grivet monkeys. force them to be eliminated from their natural Because of habitat loss and fragmentation, habitat due to the expansion of agriculture the Batiero Church Forest grivet monkeys and sett lements in the forest. were forced to feed on agricultural crops, In most countries within the range of native exacerbating human–grivet monkey confl icts. primates, the major threats to populations This led to confl ict with communities living remain extensive conversion of primate habitat around the forest. Conversion of primate into areas of human use such as agriculture and habitats into agricultural land creates the sett lements (Walsh et al. 2003). Primates living potential for confl ict between hungry primates in developing nations may be aff ected by the and local people (Mekonnen et al. 2012). economic and human population growth, with As reported by the community, grivet increasing extraction of resources from the monkeys were often found on the edges of the forest as well as modifi cation or destruction forest surrounded by agricultural farmlands of primates’ natural habitat (Serio-Silva et al. and human sett lement. Robbins et al. (2006) 2007). stated that as habitats of primates shrink and Local communities around the study area become increasingly surrounded by human reduced crop damage by guarding their sett lements, primates are forced into marginal farmland using children and dogs to scare habitats and become crop raiders. Naughton- away grivet monkeys, as well as thorny Treves (1998) reported that almost all non- vegetation as fencing. Most communities living human primate families have been identifi ed as around the forest had dogs that hunted grivet crop raiders. The cercopithecoids, most notably monkeys around forest edges to prevent crop macaques, monkeys, and baboons, are frequent damage. The risk of disease transmission to 180 Human–Wildlife Interactions 11(2) humans may increase when monkeys and could increase crop productio of alternative dogs come into physical contact because dogs crops that are unpalatable to grivet monkeys. will come into contact with humans through bodily fl uids (Chapman et al. 2005). Moreover, Acknowledgments the forest degradation associated with hunting This work was fi nanced by the Mekelle of grivet monkeys by dogs may lead to the University Department of Wildlife and disappearance of grivet monkeys from the Ecotourism Management from a recurrent forest within the coming few years. Therefore, budget. We thank the Department of Biology wildlife professionals should incorporate in Mekelle University for providing fi eld strategies in management plans to benefi t equipment. We thank Tigray Regional State wildlife and reduce depredation potential Wildlife Department for their permission (Conover 1994, Messmer and Schroeder 1996). to conduct this research and support. We Guarding their farmland from wildlife was also thank the fi eld assistant A. Abadi and a popular method in diff erent parts of Africa villagers for their assistance. Comments and (Sillero-Zubiri and Swetz er 2001). Guarding recommendations provided by the associate was especially common during the harvest editor and reviewers greatly improved the season. Farmers guard crops even during the manuscript. night. Fencing was used near villages and was made of local materials such as thorny Literature cited bush, wooden poles, and stones, but farmers Aerts, R. 2007. Church forests in Ethiopia. Fron- claimed that animals easily crossed through the tiers in Ecology and the Environment 5(2):66. fence (Mussa 2009). There could be intensive Ahsan, M. F., and M. M. Uddin. 2014. Human- management in certain high-confl ict areas to rhesus monkey confl ict at Rampur Village resolve the damage by wildlife (Elmore and under Monohardi Upazila in Narsingdi District Messmer 2006). of Bangladesh. Journal of Threatened Taxa 6:5905–5908. Management implications Aschalew, A., B. Hans, and M. Yonas. 2017. Our study reinforces the belief that sustaining Activity patterns of grivet monkeys (Chloro- primate populations outside of protected cebus aethiops L.) in Batiero Church Forest, areas will require adaptive management Northern Ethiopia. African Journal of Ecology. strategies to reduce human–primate confl icts. In press. These strategies must address human needs Baranga, D., B. G. Isabirye, J. A. Teichroeb, and and wildlife needs to make it eff ective over C. A. Chapman. 2012. Crop raiding patterns the long term. Previous studies suggest that of solitary and social groups of red-tailed mon- conservation programs and conservation keys on cocoa pods in Uganda. Tropical Con- areas lead to crop-raiding confl ict rather than servation Science 5:104–111. benefi ts to local communities. Therefore, Chapman, C. A., T. R. Gillespie, and T. L. local communities reduce their support for Goldberg. 2005. Primates and the ecology of an agreement with conservation policy and their infectious diseases: how will anthropo- practice. Alleviating confl ict and reducing genic change aff ect host-parasite interactions? damage caused by wildlife would likely Evolutionary Anthropology 14:134–144. increase acceptance of conservation and Chauhan, A., and R. S. Pirta. 2010. Socio-ecology management actions in the forest (Elmore of two species of non-human primates, rhe- et al. 2007). Thus, it may be bett er provide sus monkey (Macaca mulatta) and Hanuman alternative fuel sources for villagers such as langur (Semnopithecus entellus) in Shimla, biogas technology or solar and wind energy Himachal Pradesh. Journal of Human Ecology to reduce illegal cutt ing of trees and wildlife 30:171–177. disturbance in the forest area. Planting the 3 Conover, M. R. 1994. Perceptions of grass-roots most important tree species that contribute leaders of the agricultural community about most to the diet of the grivet money would wildlife damage on their farms and ranches. help reduce the intrusions of the monkeys to Wildlife Society Bulletin 22:94–100. neighboring fi elds. Additionally, communities Elmore, R. D., T. A. Messmer, and M. W. Brunson. Grivet monkeys • Alelign and Yonas 181

2007. Perceptions of wildlife damage and spe- crop-raiding by primates: linking food availabil- cies conservation: lessons learned from the ity in croplands and adjacent forest. Applied Utah prairie dog. Human–Wildlife Confl icts Ecology 35:596–606. 1:78–88. Peterson, M. N., J. L. Birckhead, K. Leong, M. J. Elmore, R. D., and T. A. Messmer. 2006. Public Peterson, and T. R. Peterson. 2010. Rearticu- perceptions regarding the Utah prairie dog lating the myth of human–wildlife confl ict. Con- and its management: implications for species servation Letters 3:74–82. recovery. Berryman Institute Publication No. Robbins, M. M., and G. Hohmann. 2006. Primate 23, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA. feeding ecology: an integrative approach. Ethiopian National Meteorology Agency. 2015. Pages 1–14 in G. Hohmann, M. M. Robbins, Dataset and information resources. Tigray and C. Boesch, editors. Feeding ecology in Regional Meteorological Station Information, apes and other primates: ecological, physical, Mekelle, Ethiopia. and behavioral aspects. Cambridge University Hill, C. M. 2000. Confl ict of interest between peo- Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. ple and baboons: crop raiding in Uganda. Inter- Serio-Silva, J. C. S., J. L. Alfaro, and L. T. H. national Journal of Primatology 21:23–34. Salazar. 2007. Ecology and behaviour of tropi- Hockings, K. J., and C. Sousa. 2012. Diff erential cal primates. Tropical Biology and Conserva- utilization of cashew—a low-confl ict crop—by tion Management 8:1–7. sympatric humans and chimpanzees. Oryx Sharma, G., C. D. Ram, and L. S. Rajpurohit. 46:375–381. 2011. Study of man-monkey confl ict and its Linkie, M., Y. Dinata, A. Nofrianto, and N. Lead- management in Jodhpur, Rajasthan (India). er-Williams. 2007. Patterns and perceptions Evolutionary Biology Research 3:1–3. of wildlife crop raiding in and around Kerinci Sillero-Zubiri, C., and D. Swetzer. 2001. Crop raid- Seblat National Park, Sumatra. Animal Conser- ing primate: searching for alternative, humane vation 10:127–135. ways to resolve confl ict with farmer in Africa. Mekonnen, A., B. Afework, P. J. Fashing, J. M. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Oxford Lernould, A. Anagaw, and N. C. Stenseth. University, Oxford, United Kingdom. 2012. Newly discovered bale monkey popula- Walsh, P. D., K. A. Abernethy, M. Bermejo, tions in forest fragments in southern Ethiopia: R. Beyers, P. de Wachter, M. E. Akou, B. evidence of crop raiding, hybridization with Huijbregts, D. I. Mambounga, A. K. Toham, grivets and other conservation threats. Ameri- and D. S. Wilkie. 2003. Catastrophic ape can Journal of Primatology 74:423–432. decline in western equatorial Africa. Nature Mesele,Y., B. Afework, and T. Zelealem. 2008. London 422:611–613. Human-gelada baboon confl ict in and around the Simien Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. Associate Editor: Terry A. Messmer African Journal of Ecology 47:276–282. Messmer, T. A., S. and Schroeder. 1996. Per- A˜ˌˑˊ˕ˎˠ A˕ˎ˕˒ː˗ (photo unavailable) completed a B.S. degree in wildlife and ecotourism man- ceptions of Utah alfalfa growers about wildlife agement from Hawassa University, Ethiopia, in 2010 and damage to their hay crops: implications for an M.S. degree in biology (zoology) at Mekelle University, Ethiopia, in 2013. He has been actively involved in re- managing wildlife on private land. Great Basin search projects regarding wildlife management at Mekelle Naturalist 56: 254–260. University. His research interests are wildlife management and ecology, conservation biology, genetics, avian ecol- Mojo, D., J. Rothschuh, and M. Alebachew. 2014. ogy, mammalogy, and wildlife diversity. Farmers’ perceptions of the impacts of human wildlife confl ict on their livelihood and natural Mˎˑˎ˛ˎ˝˞ Y˘˗ˊ˜ (photo unavailable) is an resource management eff orts in Cheha Woreda associate professor at Mekelle University, Ethiopia. He has a B.S. degree and an M.S. degree in biology from of Guraghe Zone, Ethiopia. Human–Wildlife Ethiopia and a Ph.D. degree in zoological sciences/ani- Interactions 8:67–77. mal ecology from the University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium. He has worked and published in wildlife, par- Mussa, A. 2009. Population status of gelada ticularly small mammals. His current research interests baboon and human–wildlife confl ict in and are pest management, ecto-parasites, bird conservation, around Denkoro forest, Ethiopia. Thesis, Addis zoonosis, and wildlife management. Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Naughton-Treves, L. 1998. Temporal patterns of