HUMAN - OLIVE BABOON (Papio Anubis L) CONFLICTS in FARMS AROUND

Home , Baboon, Olive baboon

HUMAN - OLIVE BABOON (Papio anubis L) CONFLICTS IN FARMS AROUND

MGORI FOREST RESERVE, SINGIDA, TANZANIA

MWIRU FRANCIS GILBERT (B.Ed.Sc.)

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE (ANIMAL ECOLOGY) IN

THE SCHOOL OF PURE AND APPLIED SCIENCES OF KENYATTA UNIVERSITY

November, 2017

iii

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to my Bishops Desiderius Rwoma and Edward Mapunda, the Priests and all the people of Singida region. I also dedicate it to those who through their continuing efforts are conserving the environment and life at large.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my supervisors Dr. Eunice Kairu and Dr. Linus

K. Munishi for their close guidance and supervision of my research work and thesis. I also thank

St. Augustine Catholic University of Tanzania for funding my studies at Kenyatta University,

Nairobi, Kenya. Special thanks go to my Bishops Desiderius Rwoma and Edward Mapunda who allowed me to pursue my studies. I also appreciate the assistance of Andrew Lucas, Augustine,

Juma Hamisi, Elibariki Richard, Pasaka Isango and Jeremiah Mohamed during the collection of data. They worked hard despite heat, cold or rain. My gratitude extends to my fellow priests, relatives and friends. Above all I thank the Almighty God for his support and showing me the way in order to complete this work.

TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION...... ii DEDICATION...... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... iv LIST OF TABLES...... vii LIST OF FIGURES ...... viii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...... x ABSTRACT...... xi 1. CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Background information...... 1 1.2 Problem statement...... 2 1.3 Justification of the study...... 3 1.4 Research questions...... 3 1.5 Hypotheses...... 3 1.6 Objectives of the Study...... 4 1.6.1 General Objective...... 4 1.6.2 Specific Objectives...... 4 2. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW...... 5 2.1 The distribution of Olive baboons...... 5 2.2 Habitats of Olive baboons...... 5 2.3 Diet of Olive baboons...... 7 2.4 Breeding habits of Olive baboons...... 8 2.5 The human- Olive baboon conflicts...... 10 3. CHAPTER THREE: MATERIALS AND METHODS...... 12 3.1 Study area...... 12 3.1.1 Locations...... 12 3.1.2 Climatic conditions...... 12 3.1.3 Geology and soils...... 17 3.1.4 Vegetation of the area...... 17 3.1.5 Socio-economic activities...... 18 3.2 Study population and study design...... 19 3.2.1 Study population...... 19 3.2.2 Study design...... 19 3.3 Data collection...... 20 3.3.1 Crops preferred by Olive baboons...... 20 3.3.2 Relationship between the distance of the farm and the level of crop damage...... 21 3.3.3 Local peoples' perception of the nature, extent and intensity of crop damage...... 22 3.4 Research instruments' validation and reliability...... 22 3.5 Data analysis...... 22 4. CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS...... 22 4.1 Crops preferred by Olive baboons...... 24 4.2 Crops preferred by Olive baboons in the wet and dry seasons...... 25 4.2.1 Economic loss due to crop raiding by Olive baboons...... 27

4.2.2 Animals that raid crops in Mgori...... 28 4.3 Relationship between distance of a farm from forest edge and level of crop damage...... 29 4.4 Spatial and temporal distribution of crop raiding...... 32 4.4.1 Locations of crop raiding during the wet and dry seasons...... 32 4.4.2 Testing whether troop size varied between seasons and among villages...... 34 4.4.3 Mitigation methods used by farmers to reduce crop raiding...... 35 4.5 Local peoples' perception of the nature, extent and intensity of the crop damage...... 37 4.5.1 The difference between actual and perceived levels of crop damage...... 39 5. CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 40 5.1 Discussion...... 40 5.1.1 Crops preferred by Olive baboons...... 40 5.1.2 Relationship between the distance of the farm and level of crop damage...... 43 5.1.3 The crops preferred by Olive baboons in wet and dry seasons...... 45 5.1.4 Local peoples' perception of the nature, extent and intensity of the crop damage...... 46 5.1.4.1 The methods used to mitigate crop raiding by Olive baboons and their effectiveness...... 51 5.2 Conclusions...... 54 5.3 Recommendations...... 55 5.3.1 Recommendations for this Study...... 55 5.3.2 Recommendations for further research...... 56 REFERENCES...... 57 APPENDICES...... 63 APPENDIX I: QUESTIONNAIRES AND STRUCTURED INTERVIEW…………………63 APPENDIX II: DATA COLLECTION CHECK LIST………………………………………69 APPENDIX III: PLATES FOR CROPS RAIDED AND MITIGATION METHODS…….70 APPENDIX IV: DATA COLLECTED DURING THE STUDY PERIOD…….…………...72

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1a Average rainfall (mm) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2007-2016…...... 14

Table 3.1b Total rainfall (mm) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2007-2016…………....14

Table 3.2 Average Temperature (0C) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2007-

2016...... 15

Table 4.1 ANOVA results on the effects on seasons in the distance covered by Olive

baboons……………………………………………………………………………….32

Table 4.2 ANOVA results on effects of season and village on troop size……………………...34

Table 4.3 ANOVA results on effects of season and time on baboons visiting the farm………..34

Table 4.4 Mitigation methods recorded from the field during dry and wet seasons……………36

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Distribution of Olive baboons in Africa (Mali, extending to Ethiopia and

Tanzania)………………………………………………………………………….…..6

Figure 3.1 The study site: Map of Tanzania showing the location of Singida and the enlarged

map of Singida showing Mgori Forest Reserve and the surrounding villages……...13

Figure 3.2 Total rainfall (mm) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2014-2016…………....15

Figure 3.3 Average Temperature (oC) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2014-

2016……………………………………………………………………………….…16

Figure 4.1 Crops raided by Olive baboons……………………………………………….……..24

Figure 4.2 Crops raided by Olive baboons in wet and dry seasons………………………….….25

Figure 4.3 Parts of the crop plants damaged by Olive baboons………………………………...26

Figure 4.4 Parts of the plant consumed by Olive baboons…………………………………..…..27

Figure 4.5 The total loss in revenue (US dollars) due to crop damage for all farmers………….28

Figure 4.6 Crop raiding animals recorded in the field………………………………………..…29

Figure 4.7a Relationship between distance from the forest edge and level of crop damage

during the wet season……………………………………………………………...30

Figure 4.7b Relationship between distance from the forest edge and level of crop damage

During the dry season………………………………………………………….…..31

Figure 4.8 MFR crop raiding incidents at Pohama, Mughunga and Unyampanda……………...33

Figure 4.9 Various methods used to reduce the human Olive baboon conflicts in

Mgori area, Singida……………………………………………………………..…....35

Figure 4.10 Farmers’ opinion on the crops damaged by Olive baboons…………………...……37

Figure 4.11 Wild animals involved in crop raiding in Mgori………………………………..…..38

Figure 4.12 Actual estimate and perceived levels of crop damage……………………………...39

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ANOVA: Analysis of variance df: Degree of freedom

DS: Dry Season

Eds: Editors

F: F statistic for ratios of variance

GIS: Geographic Information System

GPS: Global Positioning System

MFR: Mgori Forest Reserve

MS: Microsoft/Mean score

NBS: National Bureau of Statistics

P: Probability

PET: Potential Evapo -Transpiration

PI: Preference Indices

Pp: pages.

RS: Rain Season

SS: Sum of squares

TANAPA: Tanzania National Parks

TSHS: Tanzanian shillings

UK: United Kingdom

US: United States

WS: Wet Season

ABSTRACT

Olive baboons (Papio anubis L) are widely distributed in most tropical countries. They usually live and breed in forests. With the ever increasing human population, more and more of their natural habitats are being replaced by farms, thus decreasing the living spaces and the amount of food available. In many parts of Tanzania, the government in collaboration with the local communities has preserved the forests in their natural conditions to protect the animals’ habitat. Mgori forest reserve is one of such areas, managed by both the local community adjacent to it and the government of Tanzania. However, human beings are moving closer and closer to the Olive baboons’ living spaces, forest. Therefore, when animals occasionally move out of the forest into the neighbouring farmlands in search of food, the result is serious conflicts with the farmers. A cross-sectional study was carried out to examine the nature and extent of the conflicts during the wet and the dry season in three villages adjacent to the forest. Also the study determined the most preferred crops by Olive baboons. Data was collected along transects running from the forest edge up to 2 km into the farmlands. Methods of primary data collection included direct observations, questionnaires, focus group discussion and face to face interviews. Wilcoxon Rank sign test was used to compare intensity of raiding between the wet and dry seasons using PAST computer software. Simple linear regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between the level of crop damage and distance of the farms from the forest edge, while Two Factor ANOVA was used to test whether intensity of raiding varied significantly with season and village. The study established that the crops raided most by Olive baboons are maize, millet, sunflower and finger millet. The results indicated that the level of crop damage during the wet season decreased with increasing distance from the forest edge (R2=0.7542).Crop damage in the dry season was minimal because most of it is harvested by end of the dry season. Farmers used a variety of mitigation methods with guarding being the most preferred. This is time consuming and not very effective. It is recommended that farmers should avoid planting crops most preferred by baboons near the forest edge. Further the effort to reduce crop raiding should be a combined effort of the farmers and the government.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background information

In Africa before 1800 AD and during the colonial era (Late 1800 - 1963), primates used to roam freely in open spaces, which are now occupied by human settlements and farms (Omondi, 1994;

Muoria, 2001; Saj et al., 2001; Boobyer, 2013). This has resulted in a spatial overlap between primates and humans. The primates in question are primarily members of the genera Macaca,

Papio and Cercopithecus (Hill, 2005). For instance, the clearing of forests in Central and West

Africa for agriculture land allowed the baboons to extend their foraging range into regions from which they traditionally were excluded (Higham et al., 2009). Baboons have not been documented to have a negative impact on their environment (Muoria, 2001). Some primate species are taking advantage of the fact that they are living in close proximity to human settlements and help themselves to free and easily obtain food from the farms (Saj et al., 2001;

Barrett, 2005). Farms located within 300 metres of a forest were the most vulnerable to crop- raiding (Saj et al., 2001). Baboons are often reported to be the worst crop-raiders in Africa.

However, there is little information on the actual ecology of their crop-raiding (Warren, 2009), especially around Mgori Forest Reserve, Singida, Tanzania.

Conservative estimates predict that 18% of plant and animal species worldwide will be at acute risk of extinction by 2050 due to human activities and climate change (Thomas et al., 2004), threatening global biodiversity (Lubbe, 2013). Some animal populations may be able to shift to more favorable habitats (Lubbe, 2013), but not all, as they may encounter natural barriers such as

2 impassable mountain ranges or anthropogenic barriers as a result of human habitation (Thuiller et al., 2006). Olive baboons are mostly threatened by continuous deforestation and the destruction of their natural habitat (Parker, 1983). The rapid increase in human population coupled with degradation of existing arable land has led to encroachment on forests for agricultural purposes (Muoria, 2001). In Mgori forest, excessive pit-sawing over the last decade has played a key role in the reduction of many tree species. Only 43% of the original forest was still categorized as such (Wily, 1995). Another danger on baboon population is the baboon human conflict that has resulted in their habitats being destroyed and many of them being killed because they raid crops.

This study aimed at reaffirming that baboons were the most destructive crop raiders with scientifically based data and to suggest methods to alleviate the conflicts between the farmers and the animals at the edge of Mgori Forest Reserve in Singida Rural District, Tanzania.

1.2 Problem statement

Habitat degradation has increased significantly in the rural areas of Tanzania as more and more land is being converted into agricultural farmland. According to Luhajo (2002), forest cover in

Tanzania was declining by 0.73% annually. In 1993 forests covered 44 million hectares of the country; in 2002 the forest cover decreased to 33.5 million hectares (Musendo, 2002). If this trend continues, by 2020 forest cover is expected to have declined to about 28.4 million hectares

(Musendo, 2002). This would have a serious impact on the number of Olive baboons who depend on trees for their survival. Mgori Forest Reserve covers 44,000 hectares and was established in 1995 and till now (2017) is still in pristine condition but destruction is looming

(Luhajo, 2002). Human population in the villages around Mgori Forest Reserve has increased

3 substantially. Philemon (2012) reported that over 1000 people have invaded the Reserve to establish permanent settlements and large-scale farms. Wanton tree felling has become the order of the day (Philemon, 2012). Serious conflicts between Olive baboons and humans are occurring at the edge of the reserve and local people have asked the government to assist in dealing with the problem. In order to address this problem, the nature and level of the human-baboon conflict has to be clarified and that was the aim of this study.

1.3 Justification of the study

Human Olive baboon conflict in Mgori Forest Reserve has been on increase. The situation is becoming worse because farmers are encroaching to the forest. In order for the government to implement an effective mitigation strategies, findings on the level of Human – Olive baboon conflicts and its cause is of paramount importance. No scientifically reliable studies, focusing on the extent of the human–Olive baboon conflict, its frequency and the impact on the surrounding farm areas, have ever been conducted in Mgori. There is a need to document the size and the impact of the problem and provide this information to the authorities, so that they can institute appropriate strategies to alleviate the conflicts.

1.4 Research questions

i. Which crops are preferred by Olive baboons?

ii. What is the relationship between the distance of the farm from the forest edge and the

level of crop damage?

iii. How much does seasonal change influence the level of crop damage?

iv. What are the perceptions of the local people regarding the nature, extent and intensity of

the crop damage?

1.5 Hypotheses

i. All crops are equally preferred by Olive baboons.

ii. There is no relationship between the distance of the farm from the forest edge and level

of crop damage.

iii. There is a difference in the level of crops damaged by Olive baboon in wet and dry

seasons.

iv. The community has no clear idea of the nature, extent and intensity of crop damage by

Olive baboons.

1.6 Objectives of the Study

1.6.1 General Objective

To determine the frequency and severity of conflicts between humans living in the vicinity of

Mgori Forest Reserve and Olive baboons.

1.6.2 Specific Objectives

i. To determine whether all crops were equally preferred by Olive baboons.

ii. To investigate the relationship between the level of crop damage and the distance of the

farm from forest edge.

iii. To compare level of crop damage in the wet and dry seasons.

iv. To investigate the community’s perception on the nature, extent and intensity of the crop

damage in the study area.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 The distribution of Olive baboons

Olive baboons (Papio Anubis L) are among the most widely distributed primates in the world

(Grobler et al., 2006) inhabiting savannahs, woodlands, forests and cultivated environments.

According to Groves (2001) they adapt easily to a variety of environments, occurring throughout the 25 equatorial African countries, extending from Mali eastward to Ethiopia and Tanzania

(Figure 2.1). The areas they chose to occupy were primarily non-random and carefully chosen

(Makin et al., 2012). They are both terrestrial and arboreal animals (Barnes, 2009).

2.2 Habitats of Olive baboons

Baboons (genus Papio) are large-bodied, semi-terrestrial primates that occupy a diversity of habitats (Okecha and Newton-Fisher, 2006). Habitat selection is predominantly dependant on the amount of food available and the absence of predators (Chapman, 1987). They use terrestrial habitats, and forage across a 3-dimensional landscape (Makin et al., 2012). Within their territories they return to known feeding and sleeping sites daily providing an opportunity for scientists to observe the behaviour of the animals (Jasinska et al., 2013). Troops sleep in trees, on cliffs and on the roof tops of buildings (Hoffman and O’Riain, 2012). Baboons are well studied in savannah grasslands, but relatively little is known about their behaviour in other habitats, particularly in forests, into which they penetrate to various extents (Higham et al., 2009).

According to Naughton-Treves et al. (1998), Olive baboons are found abundantly in forest edge environments. Their sleeping sites are usually located in close proximity to urban areas, where

Figure 2.1 Distribution of Olive Baboons in Africa (Mali, extending to Ethiopia and Tanzania)

(Source: maps.iucnredlist.org/map.html?id=40647)

7 they can help themselves to food. They are also found along the coastline on difficult to reach exposed cliffs (Hoffman and O’Riain, 2012).

As the baboons often live in marginal habitats, they are vulnerable if environmental conditions change rapidly (Lubbe, 2013). They prefer warm, tropical areas where they can get food all year round (McDaniel, 2004). Baboons do not exploit forest interiors (Cardini et al., 2013). However, they do leave their territorial boundaries during extended periods of drought in search of water

(McDougall et al., 2010).

The population dynamics of Olive baboons is also determined by the relationship they have with the humans in their habitat (Baillie et al., 2004). Sometimes they are called savanna monkeys as they often forage in the grasslands (Lavigne, 2009). Olive baboons love cultivated crops as they are easily obtainable (Boulton et al., 1996). They are social animals and can adapt to a wide range of ambient temperature and arid environments, because the species has developed a specialized thermoregulatory system to control its body temperature (McFarland et al., 2014).

2.3 Diet of Olive baboons

Priority of access to food enhances individual fitness (Whitten, 1983). Rank-related differences in diet occur when food is available in clumps, but not when it is distributed randomly (Whitten,

1983). Across populations, baboons show a great variety in what they eat. When foraging they selectively choose a wide array of plants to satisfy their nutritional needs (Okecha and Newton-

Fisher, 2006). In Arabuko-Sokoke Forest in Kenya, they have very diverse diets as they raid most of the cultivated crops on adjacent farms and in the forest (Muoria, 2001) and have learnt to exploit fruits of exotic trees available in the forest plantations. In a study of Olive baboons in

Nigeria it was reported that Baboons, including weaned infants, ate all crops, but only adult males ate bananas (Warren, 2009).

In their natural undisturbed habitat baboons’ diet comprises fruit, stems, tubers, leaves, seeds, insects, mushrooms and bark, gums and soil (Johnson et al., 2012). Crop-raiding occurs mainly at times when few or no fruit is available in the forest (Naughton-Treves et al., 1998). Olive baboons love corn and sweet potatoes (Saj et al., 2001). This type of diet is as a result of the disappearance of many bush foliage species they used to consume (Struhsaker, 1973). Baboons also feed on various invertebrates, rodents, chicken on some of the farms adjacent to the forest and around the staff quarters at Gede Forest Station (Muoria, 2001).

Kate (2012) observed that Olive baboons feed on roots, fruits and seeds, but only in rare cases, when they fail to get fruit or a maize cob, they destroy the plant stem and the leaves, or uproot crops such as legumes. Warren (2009) found that crops eaten in the farms vary from ripe maize to scraps of sweet potato in harvested fields. Baboons even take root and tuber crops ignored by other primates. They are not fussy eaters (Naughton-Treves, 1998).

No studies have been made in Mgori Forest Reserve showing the food items mostly preferred by baboons. One of the objectives of this study was to document the crops grown by farmers around the reserve and which ones are preferred by baboons.

2.4 Breeding habits of Olive baboons

Olive baboons are long-lived animals (Lubbe, 2013). They can live for 20-30 years (Barnes,

2009). They are the most successful and ubiquitous African monkeys, renowned for their

9 behavioural and reproductive flexibility, which enables them to inhabit a wide variety of habitats

(Higham et al., 2009). Their gestation period is 6 months and a single baby is born which clings to its mother’s stomach, later moving to her back while she continues her daily activities

(Barnes, 2009).

According to Higham et al. (2009) the way they live and their group size is dependent on the climatic conditions of their habitat. Climatic conditions influence the availability of plants and resources, hence indirectly determining the condition and fertility of the female (Higham et al.,

2009). Abundance of rainfall was found to be positively correlated with the likelihood of conception in the baboon population of the Drakensberg, suggesting that food availability mediates this link with female ovulation, although seasonal changes in temperature may also be important (Lycett et al., 1999). In the Amboseli National Park in Kenya, periods of drought reduced the likelihood of female pregnancy and increased fetal loss (Beehner et al., 2006). Food scarcity was linked to increases in infant and juvenile mortality (Altmann et al., 1985). However, accurate data on the reproductive cycles of baboons is limited because of the difficulties of recording these events reliably in free-ranging individuals (Andelman et al., 1985). Female baboons sexually mature earlier than males (Turner et al., 1997). Adequate nutrition is a prerequisite for successful reproduction (Rothman et al., 2012). Grooming is commonly used as a courtship strategy (Hill, 1965).

Baboons in most areas are seasonal breeders, but different species may differ in the timing and spacing of producing off-springs (Rowell and Richard, 1979). The baboons’ birth seasons are apparently independent of the season (Rowell, 2014). Higher ranking individuals reproduce more frequently due to their superior diet (Whitten, 1983). Baboons are characterized by relatively

10 rapid maturation and reproduction in comparison to other Cercopithecidae species (Rowell and

Richards, 1979; Bolter and Zihlman, 2003).

2.5 The human- Olive baboon conflicts

Human-wildlife conflicts often arise because of crop-raiding (Wallace and Hill, 2012). At Kibale in Uganda, baboons damaged the greatest area of crops (Naughton-Treves, 1998). Three factors influence the intensity of baboon crop-raiding: the distance of the farms from the forests, the types of crops grown and types of measures taken by the locals to prevent raiding (Saj et al.,

2001). For farmers baboons are a problem because of the destruction they cause at every stage of the growth of the crop, and the time and energy required to prevent these events (Warren, 2008).

There are indirect costs of baboon crop raiding such as increased labor demands to protect crops and, occasionally, to replant crop stands which had been badly damaged by the baboons (Hill,

2000). Olive baboons are considered agricultural pests and can cause extensive damage to commercial and subsistence crops (Hill, 2000).

Primates are particularly successful crop raiders due to their cooperative behaviour, opportunistic foraging lifestyle, omnivorous diet and their ability to learn rapidly and adapt to changing circumstances (Hill, 2000). According to Mittermeier and van Roosmalen (1981), Olive baboons are plant and seed predators. It has been noted that baboons with greater experience, access and process crop items more efficiently and avoid detection by farmers more often or for longer periods of time (Wallace and Hill, 2012). Farmers residing next to conservation areas such as game parks and forest reserves (<500 metres distance) suffer the most crop loss. Consequently, many of them resent the presence of parks and protected forests (Naughton-Treves, 1996 and

1997). Farmers and gardeners regard baboons to be problem animals (Grobler et al., 2006). On

11 the other hand, free-roaming Olive baboons play an important ecological role by creating a balanced environment from which we all benefit (Boobyer, 2013). In addition the farmers' perceptions of the damage may exceed the actual damage they cause (Siex and Struhsaker,

1999). Therefore, there is need to quantify the actual loss of crops caused by the baboons and this study hoped to do so at Mgori Forest Reserve and the surrounding farms. The information would be useful when designing mitigation strategies.

In order to reduce crop damage by baboons, farmers apply a variety of deterrent methods, including guarding, fencing with fish nets, poisoning, olfactory, visual and auditory scaring devices (Warren, 2009). All these methods are used to scare Olive baboons off farmland. Other common methods used are shouting and chasing of the animals (Warren, 2009). At Budongo

Forest Reserve (Western Uganda) each farmer guards his crop individually (Wallace and Hill,

2012). Farmers around Mgori Forest reserve use similar methods. Since these methods are costly in terms of time and energy, it is important to evaluate their effectiveness with hope of recommending the appropriate ones based on research evidence.

CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Study area

3.1.1 Locations

This study was conducted in three of the five villages neighbouring the Mgori Forest Reserve,

Singida Rural District, Tanzania (Figure 3.1). Mgori is located between latitude 4° 45' and 4° 58' south and longitude 35° 5' and 35° 22' east. It is 1496 metres above sea level and it lies about 50 kilometres north east of the town of Singida. Mgori forest was declared a reserve in the 1980s to be cared for according to the Participatory Forest Management Scheme. The total area is 44,000 hectares (Wily and Mbaya, 2001). Human population around the forest reserve is estimated to be

14,461 people (NBS, 2012).

3.1.2 Climatic conditions

Mgori lies in the semi- arid central zone of Tanzania which experiences low and erratic rainfall.

There is usually one short rainy season, but the timing of the rains is erratic, with rains completely missing almost every four years. Normally, it rains from December to April. The area experiences about 7 months of dry season from early May to mid-November (Figure 3.2). It receives an average annual rainfall of between 410 millilitres and 1070 millilitres, with slight variability in different parts of the area (Table 3.1a and b). The average temperatures in the region vary according to altitude, but generally range from about 15°C in July to 30°C in

October (Table 3.2 and Figure 3.3)..

Figure 3.1 The Study Site:Map of Tanzania showing the location of Singida and enlarged map of Singida showing Mgori Forest Reserve and the surrounding villages (Source: NBS, 2012)

Table 3.1a Mean monthly rainfall (mm) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2007-2016

MONTH YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 JANUARY 7.8 2.3 6.4 3.0 3.8 3.5 7.6 6.8 4.2 5.2 FEBRUARY 4.7 5.5 2.1 4.7 1.5 1.8 1.8 3.9 1.5 5.4 MARCH 1.8 7.0 6.6 2.1 3.1 3.2 4.5 0.3 0.8 3.4 APRIL 1.8 0.2 1.8 0.2 0.3 1.3 8.9 0.6 5.3 4.7 MAY 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 JUNE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 JULY 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 AUGUST 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SEPTEMBER 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 OCTOBER 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.7 0.3 1.0 NOVEMBER 0.2 4.5 4.0 1.0 3.9 1.2 1.5 1.7 3.0 0.2 DECEMBER 5.3 2.6 7.5 4.3 6.6 6.5 3.7 7.8 5.4 2.9 TOTAL/YEAR 22.3 22.1 29.1 15.5 19.3 17.9 28.2 22.8 20.7 22.8

Table 3.1b Total monthly rainfall (mm) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2007-2016

MONTH YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 JANUARY 242.0 69.9 199.4 93.8 117.6 107.1 235.9 210.6 130.0 162.0 FEBRUARY 131.0 159.7 59.4 130.7 41.2 52.6 51.1 109.1 43.0 156.8 MARCH 56.0 215.8 203.6 64.0 97.5 97.6 140.2 93.9 24.7 104.7 APRIL 53.1 6.1 55.2 5.8 7.8 38.3 266.7 17.7 158.8 141.0 MAY 18.9 0.0 19.9 3.7 0.2 4.8 3.0 1.0 6.0 0.0 JUNE 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 JULY 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 AUGUST 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SEPTEMBER 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 OCTOBER 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 6.3 0.0 52.9 9.0 29.6 NOVEMBER 5.0 133.6 121.3 29.6 116.5 36.4 46.1 52.1 89.0 5.4 DECEMBER 165.5 80.3 231.5 132.0 204.0 201.9 116.0 240.5 167.0 91.2 TOTAL/YEAR 693.3 665.4 890.3 456.6 587.2 545.0 859.0 778.2 628.3 690.7

Figure 3.2 Total monthly rainfall (mm) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2014-2016

Table 3.2 Average Temperature (oC) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2007-

2016

MONTH YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min JANUARY 26.6 17.4 27.4 17.3 27.5 17.1 27.2 17.2 27.4 17.0 FEBRUARY 26.7 17.1 26.0 16.5 27.0 16.9 28.1 17.7 28.2 16.9 MARCH 27.3 17.2 26.5 16.8 27.9 17.2 28.1 17.8 28.2 17.1 APRIL 27.1 17.1 25.4 16.4 26.3 16.9 27.9 17.6 27.7 16.9 MAY 26.1 16.2 26.0 15.1 27.2 16.1 27.1 16.7 27.8 16.2 JUNE 25.4 14.6 25.4 13.7 26.7 15.2 26.5 15.0 27.6 14.9 JULY 25.5 14.1 25.6 13.5 25.6 13.3 25.7 13.8 27.5 13.8 AUGUST 26.5 14.6 26.7 14.4 26.8 14.5 26.8 14.1 27.4 14.4 SEPTEMBER 28.6 15.5 28.8 15.7 29.0 15.6 28.3 14.9 28.9 15.8 OCTOBER 29.3 16.1 29.6 17.1 29.5 17.0 30.4 15.9 30.1 17.1 NOVEMBER 29.9 17.8 28.7 17.9 28.3 17.5 30.3 18.0 29.7 17.4

DECEMBER 26.7 17.4 27.5 17.3 27.5 17.5 27.8 17.4 26.2 17.3 MONTH YEAR 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min JANUARY 27.4 16.9 27.6 17.4 26.5 16.9 26.4 16.8 26.3 17.4 FEBRUARY 28.2 16.9 28.0 17.1 25.9 16.6 28.7 17.3 27.1 17.3 MARCH 27.4 16.9 27.5 17.6 26.8 17.0 29.1 17.6 29.1 18.2 APRIL 26.2 16.6 25.9 16.7 26.0 16.8 26.2 17.0 26.0 17.3 MAY 26.2 15.7 25.4 15.4 25.6 15.4 25.4 16.0 25.6 15.0 JUNE 24.2 14.5 25.1 13.3 25.6 14.5 26.5 18.4 25.0 13.8 JULY 26.1 13.6 25.7 13.2 25.7 13.7 25.9 17.3 25.2 13.9 AUGUST 27.0 14.2 25.9 13.8 26.4 14.7 26.5 14.2 25.9 14.4 SEPTEMBER 28.6 15.1 28.6 15.5 27.0 15.1 28.6 15.4 27.5 16.1 OCTOBER 30.0 17.1 29.2 16.3 28.3 16.8 29.4 17.5 29.2 17.9 NOVEMBER 29.2 17.2 29.7 17.8 29.2 17.4 28.1 17.8 29.9 17.7 DECEMBER 27.6 17.5 27.0 17.5 26.9 17.1 27.0 17.2 28.9 17.4

C) 30 ◦ 29

26 2014 25 2015 24 2016

Monthly Monthly maximum temperature( 23

Month

Figure 3.3 Average Temperature (oC) at Singida Meteorological Station from 2014-

2016

Temperature differences between day and night are high especially during the dry season. Winds follow a monsoonal pattern being north-easterly between November and March and south- easterly for the rest of the year. These are mostly dry winds that contribute to the desertification of the area. September is usually the month with the most sunshine. The humidity index P/PET ranges from 0.5 to 0.65, where P is the mean annual precipitation and PET the potential evapo- transpiration rate (the sum of evaporation and plant transpiration). The forest is located in the

Great Rift Valley (Wily, 1995) which extends from Malawi through Tanzania and to the Dead

Sea in Israel.

3.1.3 Geology and soils

The whole of the Singida region has the same geological characteristics; granite batholiths modified by basalt flows from previous volcanic activities. The top soil in the valleys and low laying areas is fertile, being clay loam soil. Its depth is adequate for plant growth.

3.1.4 Vegetation of the area

Apart from small agricultural areas the land is still covered with natural grasses and shrubs. The area is characterized by Miombo woodlands. Brachystegia, Isornabia, Pterocarpus angolensis

DC, Terminalia and Combretum are the dominant plant species. Most of these trees are characterized by an open canopy which grows up to 20 meters in height. Valuable hardwood timbers, such as Pterocarpus angolensis DC, Afzelia quanzensis Welw and Dalbergia melanoxylon Guill. and Perr. are also found in the area (Wily, 1995). Much of the remaining land is dominated by Combretum, Terminalia and Acacia species mostly in the lower regions. The area is rich in wildlife, harbouring a variety of bird species (Aves) and other animals (Wily,

1995).

Brachystegia species are usually dominant canopy trees. However, Julbernardia species dominate in areas that are poor in nutrients. Isoberlina are common on the western parts of

Singida. The other tree species associated with these dominant woodland species are Burkea,

Ficus, Monotes, Pterocarpus and Xeroderis. The Miombo has an understory tree layer dominated by several species of Combretum, Terminalia and in the lower regions Acacia. This natural vegetation serves as the natural habitat of baboon for hiding against enemies, sleeping at night, feeding during the day and resting after feeding.

3.1.5 Socio-economic activities

Agriculture is the dominant economic activity of the inhabitants neighbouring the Mgori

Community Forest Reserve. The villages are very close to the forest occupying at least 15% of the declared buffer zone. The area is cultivated producing mainly finger millet, maize, potatoes, sunflowers, pumpkins and beans (Wily, 1995).

Farmers plant the seeds in November either before rain or immediately after it has started raining. Planting can be done as cultivation is going on depending on the growing period of the crop. Harvesting period start in April and end in June. The period between July and October is characterized mostly with preparation of farms for the next season.

3.2 Study population and study design

3.2.1 Study population

Farmers cultivating farms within 2 kilometres from the forest edge were included in this study.

Four thousand households around the Mgori Forest Reserve (NBS, 2012) formed the target population.

Sample size was determined by the formula used by Fisher et al., (1998):

Where: N = Sample size Z = 1.96 at 95% confidence interval p = Proportionate target population with the same characteristics 0.5 = p q = 1 – p = 1 – 0.5 = 0.5 d = degree of accuracy (0.05) known as statistical significance. D = Design effect =1 where p = 0.5

Thus,

=384

According to Fisher et al. (1998), the minimum number of respondents needed for this study was

384 but a sample of 450 respondents was used.

3.2.2 Study design

Three villages were chosen from the five that are neighbouring Mgori Forest Reserve (Fig. 3.1).

The villages were Pohama, Mughunga and Unyampanda. Studies were carried out during the wet

20 and the dry season at distances of ≤ 2 kilometres from the forest edge to the respective farms (Saj et al., 2001). Three transects of about 2 kilometres each were marked and designated A, B and C.

A cross-sectional survey was used to study the human-Olive baboon conflict.

3.3 Data collection

The movement of each troop from the forest to the farm was monitored. Their movement was recorded as GPS coordinates using a hand held GPS receiver. First the animals were habituated to the presence of the observers (Isbell et al., 1999). Data were collected along the line and belt transects (A, B and C) in the three villages every 50 metres up to 2 kilometres away from the forest edge. Baboon troops at the sampling points were counted. Each troop was monitored everyday from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm during the dry and the wet season along the three transects A,

B and C.

3.3.1 Crops preferred by Olive baboons

The researcher organized and held meetings and discussions with five (5) leaders in each village and administered the questionnaires and interviews to the farmers so as to get their understanding of the problem of crop raiding by animals in their farms. The leaders of a village were invited in a meeting that was held in the village office where the researcher presented the topic with guided questions and the leaders were to respond freely. Among other things the farmers and leaders named the animals that raid crops in Mgori.

The researcher carried out direct observation of crops raided and recorded the type of crop which was damaged, whether it was a single species stand or an intercropped stand, the part of the plant consumed and the stage of plant growth and recorded (Hill, 2000). According to Naughton-

Treves (2008), the visibility of the crop from a distance is also a predictor of how much damage will occur to the farm.

The researcher estimated crop loss in terms of the number of stems damaged per acre; then into number of bags that were to be harvested in that damaged plot and then the price of one bag of that crop in Tanzanian shillings (TSHS). This was done as follows: the number of stems per acre was counted (1 acre = X stems) and the number of damaged stems was counted at the same time as Y damaged stems. To know the size of the farm that was damaged (Z acres) the computation was done as follows:

Then Z acres obtained was converted into the number of bags (100kg@) that could be harvested in that plot times the price of 1 bag of that crop in Tanzanian Shillings. That is,

. The crop loss in

Tanzanian shillings was then converted in US dollars.

3.3.2 Relationship between the distance of the farm and level of crop damage.

Farmers situated along each transect, were recruited into the study and trained on how to collect data on crop raids daily for 12 hours. They were provided with data sheets and trained on how to record the data. For each crop raiding incidence, the farmer recorded the animal species involved and the time of raiding (Appendix III and IV).

The researcher also confirmed the species involved by observing the bite size and the spoor of the animal. The number of damaged stems in each farm was recorded as well as crop maturity

(Naughton-Treves, 1998). GPS records were used to map out the hotspots of crop raids

(Mwangi, 2013). This was done both during the rainy and dry seasons. More information was obtained from the farmers by conducting interviews and administering questionnaires (Appendix

I).

3.3.3 Local peoples’ perception of the nature, extent and intensity of the crop damage

Researchers recorded the farmers’ behaviour towards baboons and mitigation strategies against crop raiding by direct observation. More information was obtained during the focus group discussion.

3.4 Research instruments’ validation and reliability

According to Mwangi (2013) and Mugenda and Mugenda (1999), the researcher conducted a pilot study on a different site with 30 respondents who were not part of the current study. The pilot group was taught how to take GPS readings and how to use a compass and a tape measure.

This survey endorsed the suitability of the research instruments (Kothari, 2004). Experts at

Kenyatta University in the School of Pure and Applied Sciences in the Department of Zoological

Sciences also confirmed the appropriateness of the proposed instruments and research methods.

3.5 Data analysis

Quantitative data were entered into MS Excel and PAST computer software packages for analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data collected from questionnaires, interviews and focus group discussion. Wilcoxon signed-rank (W) was used to compare the size of crop damage due to seasonality and to test the difference between actual and perceived levels of crop damage. Regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between the distance of the farm from the forest edge and crop damage along each transect in wet and dry season.

ANOVA was used to compare mean distances from forest edge between seasons and among villages, to determine whether troop size varied between seasons and among villages and the effects of season and time of the day when baboons visited farms. The spatial occurrence of raiding instances along transect were mapped by using GIS software (Mwangi, 2013).

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

4.1 Crops preferred by Olive baboons

A total of one hundred and thirty four (134) incidences of crop raiding were recorded during the study period. Crops raided include maize (Zea mays L), millet (Pennisetum glaucum L),

Sorghum, sunflower (Helianthus annuus L), finger millet (Eleucine coracana L), Groundnuts

(Arachis hypogaea L), Bambara bean (Vigna subterranean L), pumpkins (Cucurbita) and legume (Fabaceae). Figure 4.1 shows that most of the raids were on millet, sunflower, maize and finger millet.

Figure 4.1 Crops raided by Olive baboons

4.2 Crops preferred by Olive baboon in the wet and dry seasons

Figure 4.2 show nine (9) different crops that were cultivated at Mgori. These are maize, sunflower, millet, finger millet, groundnuts, Bambara bean, sorghum, pumpkins and legume.

Four (4) crops (millet, sunflower, maize and finger millet) were more preferred by Olive baboons in both wet and dry season to groundnuts, Bambara bean, sorghum, pumpkins and legume.

Baobab plant was also preferred by Olive baboon during the dry season. Crop raiding was more intense in the wet season compared to dry season (Wilcoxon signed – rank: W-value = 2, critical value of W- value =3, N=8). The probability of getting a W-value of 2 is less than 0.05.

Therefore, the result is significant at p<0.05 meaning that raiding was more in the wet than in the dry season though the same crops were raided in the two seasons.

Figure 4.2 Crops raided by Olive baboons in wet and dry seasons.

Examination of the parts of the plants preferred showed that the raiding animals damaged either the whole plant or a part of the plant. These parts included fruit, seed, stem, root or leaf (Figure

4.3) with seeds being the most preferred. Raiding was more on fruits compared to the whole plant which was the least raided. The baboon preferred different parts at different times of the year.The whole plant was consumed especially in March and the plant parts like fruit, root, stem, leaf and seed were raided in April, May and beginnind of June. From May to August the Olive baboons raided mainly seeds and roots as left overs in the farms (Figure 4.4).

Figure 4.3 Parts of the crop plants damaged by Olive baboons

Figure 4.4 Parts of the plant consumed by Olive baboons at different times of the year

4.2.1 Economic loss due to crop raiding by Olive baboons

To determine the loss in revenue due to crop damage, the number of damaged plants of each crop was counted and yield loss estimated. The yield loss was then converted into revenue loss by multiplying proportion of crop lost by the total expected revenue projected based on previous harvests and prices (100kg for each bag). Calculations were done in Tanzanian shillings then converted into US dollars. At the time of the study 1 US dollar was equivent to 2,247.27

Tanzanian shilling (TSHS). The results are shown in figure 4.5.

Figure 4.5 Total loss in revenue(US dollars) due to crop damage for all farmers

4.2.2 Animals that raid crops in Mgori

During the field study, it was observed that eight (8) animals were involved in crop raiding.

These were Olive baboon (Papio anubis L), Vervet monkey (Cercopithecus aethiops L), Kudu

(Tragelaphus imberbis Pallas, 1766), Thomson’s gazelle (Eudorcas thomsonii Günther, 1884),

Elephant (Loxodonta africana Blumenbach, 1797), Mongoose (Herpestidae), Warthog

(Phacochoerus africanus Gmelin, 1788) and Wild pig (Potamochoerus porcus L). Baboons were the most common crop raiders during both wet and dry seasons followed by Vervet monkey,

Kudu, Thompson’s gazelle, Elephant, Warthog and Wild pig (Figure 4.6).

Figure 4.6 Crop raiding animals recorded in the field

4.3 Relationship between distance of a farm from forest edge and level of crop damage

The relationship between distance and level of crop damage was determined by regression of logarithm of area of crops destroyed (acres) against distance (metres) from forest edge. During the wet season, there was a significant inverse relationship between distance and level of damage as shown by the results of regression analysis (R2 = 0.7542, figure 4.7a). As the distance from forest edge increased, crop damage decreased. The relationship between distance and damage in the dry season was also inverse though not significant (R2=0.0015, figure 4.7b).

Figure 4.7a Relationship between distance from the forest edge and level of crop damage

during the wet season

Figure 4.7b Relationship between distance from the forest edge and level of crop damage

during the dry season

4.4 Spatial and temporal distribution of crop raiding

4.4.1 Locations of crop raiding during the wet and dry seasons

GPS coordinates of the spots where raiding occurred were plotted on the map of the study area using Arc View software. The results are shown in figure 4.8. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was done to compare mean distances from forest edge between seasons and among villages and results are shown in table 4.1. On average, baboons travelled longer distances into farmland in

Unyampanda (7550 m) than in Pohama (960 m) and Mughunga (741.7 m).

Table 4.1 ANOVA results on the effects of seasons in the distance covered by Olive Baboons

ANOVA Source of F Variation SS df MS F P-value critical

Seasons 3597344 1 3597344 64.3 5.96E09 4.171

Villages 3.59E+08 2 1.8E+08 3212.0 1.02E35 3.316

Interaction 80022.22 2 40011.11 0.7 0.49718 3.316

Within 1678000 30 55933.33

Total 3.65E+08 35

Figure 4.8 MFR crop raiding incidents at Pohama, Mughunga and Unyampanda farms

4.4.2 Testing whether troop size varied between seasons and among villages

The results of analysis of variance show that troop size did not vary significantly with season or with village (Table 4.2). Likewise, crop raiding did not vary significantly with either season or time of the day (Table 4.3).

Table 4.2 ANOVA results on effects of season and village on troop size

ANOVA Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value Seasons 280.2 1 280.2 15.422 0.05915

Villages 434.33 2 217.17 11.954 0.0772

Error 36.33 2 18.17

Total 750.83 5

To investigate,

Table 4.3 ANOVA results on effects of season and time of a day when baboons visited

farms

ANOVA Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value Seasons 988.17 1 988.17 10.384 0.08431

Time 144.33 2 72.17 0.758 0.5687

Error 190.33 2 95.17

Total 1322.83 5

4.4.3 Mitigation methods used by farmers to reduce crop raiding

When farmers were asked to name the methods they used to mitigate crop raiding they gave a list of eleven (11) methods (Figure 4.9). Of the 347 respondents: about 89% said they guarded their farms, 78% used dogs, 62% chased the animals away, and 52% used scarecrows. Other methods included killing (20%), shooting bow and arrow (13%), hand clubs (10%), traps (8%), can bombs (3%) and poisoning (3%).

Figure 4.9 Various methods used to reduce the human baboon conflicts in Mgori area,

Singida.

The researcher also observed himself the methods farmers were using to mitigate crop raiding.

Results are shown in table 4.4.

Table 4.4 Mitigation methods recorded from the field during dry and wet seasons

Method Frequency Wet season Dry season Guarding 66 0 Chasing 56 0 Dogs 31 1 Killing 15 1 Scare crow 12 0 Bow and arrow 9 1 Hand club 7 1 Traps 4 0 Poisoning 2 0 Can bombs 2 0 Fire 1 0

4.5 Local peoples’ perception of the nature, extent and intensity of the crop damage

Farmers were asked to name five crops that are damaged by olive baboons. The results are shown in figure 4.10.

Figure: 4.10 Farmers’ opinion on the crops damaged by the Olive baboons

Farmers were further asked to name the five animals that raid crops. Results are shown in figure

4.11.

Figure: 4.11 Wild animals involved in crop raiding in Mgori.

4.5.1 The difference between actual and perceived levels of crop damage.

There was a difference of damage in acres between the results of the interviews regarding the perceived level of crop damage and the actual estimated levels of damage as shown by

Wilcoxon signed - rank test that W-value is 3. The Critical value of W for N=6 at p≤0.05 is 0.

Therefore, the result is not significant at p≤0.05 (Figure 4.12). Therefore, the perceived data was larger than the actual estimated value of the crop damage at Mgori.

Figure 4.12 Actual estimate and perceived levels of crop damage

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Discussion

5.1.1 Crops preferred by Olive baboons

At least eleven types of crops were grown in the area around the Mgori Forest Reserve. Farms around Mgori Forest Reserve produced predominantly sunflowers, millet, finger millet, sorghum and maize crops. These crops were cultivated in large quantities at the edge of the forest reserve because of the fertile soil and big need of the farmers of these crops. Other crops cultivated in that area in relatively small quantities were groundnuts, pumpkins, beans, Bambara beans, cassava and sweet potatoes because they were only contributing to the major crops to satisfy the needs of the farmers and their families. All these crops were raided by wildlife including baboons to supplement their own diet. The larger the fields, the greater the damage as the plants were more conspicuous.

Baboons ate different parts of the plants depending on the latter’s stage of the development. The stems of maize, sorghum and sunflowers were eaten before the crops matured. Maize cobs, sunflower seeds, finger millet seeds and sorghum seeds were consumed just before harvest. They also ate potatoes and cassava roots. The baboons probably like these parts because they are soft, palatable, nutritious, digestible and simple to pluck out. Although other foods were available in the forest they preferred cultivated crops probably because some of them were more nutritious and tasteful. Further, the cultivated crops were close to their sleeping sites and to the forest edge

41 thus easier to obtain. Also the baboons could quickly run away and hide in the forest when detected and chased away. Maize, millet, sunflowers and finger millet were all planted close to the forest edge and were therefore vulnerable to crop raiding.

Crop raiding translated into loss of crop yield and ultimately loss of revenue. For instance, sunflower seeds were mainly sold commercially while the rest of the yield could be consumed by the family and only sold, if abundant, to meet other family needs like health, school fees and various taxes. Hence, If commercial crops are damaged the family may not be able to meet its basic needs, such as paying for doctors, hospital visits or school fees. Most farmers were subsistence farmers and could not afford to buy food if their crops had been raided by baboons.

The situation is aggravated by the fact that the Government of Tanzania does not compensate farmers for damaged crops.

Similar results have been observed elsewhere. Barirega et al. (2010) reported that in Western

Uganda the households adjacent to the park had a lower dietary diversity index than the households far away from it. The diet in Kichwamba was 8% less diverse than in other counties.

In Nyakiyumbu the figure was 20%. This implied that in affected areas the food security was reduced by an overall annual average of 14%. In these areas livestock was also threatened by wild animals.

Kagoro-Rugundo (2004) in Uganda found that farmers around protected areas lost money and sometimes their lives when they tried to protect their crops. Mfunda and Roskaft (2011) in the

Serengeti in Tanzania reported that most households were engaged in crop production and livestock keeping (70%), and only 30% of people were employed. The average annual income

42 per household was USD 799. Saj et al. (2001) said that in Uganda crop losses due to baboon activities ranged from USD 30 to USD 80 per month and the seasonal losses ranged from USD

80 to USD 400. Therefore, about half of the income was destroyed through losses by animals.

One alternative to overcome the loss and suffering caused by crop raiding would be to get alternative sources of income. An alternative revenue stream for the locals which has been suggested is bee-keeping which does not interfere with the wildlife. This was done in the zone of the forest where people were allowed to put their beehives, collect dry firewood, harvesting fruits and mushrooms without causing any harm to the biodiversity of the forest. However, these activities have not replaced cultivation.

Another way of discouraging farmers encroaching on the forest and thus causing baboon human conflict is for the ministry of Tourism and Natural Resources to share its revenues accrued from the resources in the forest with the local communities. The money could be used to build schools, health centres, water pumps or dams and food during catastrophic natural disasters. If people felt they were taken into account, listened to and benefitted from the forest, they would be prepared to follow the above recommendations and not encroach on the forest. The community would feel that they were stakeholders in the preservation of the forest and would take part in the management of it. The TANAPA (Tanzania National Parks) organization has been working towards this goal. It has been providing social services for the communities around the National parks. However, even this has not stopped the farmers encroaching into the forest and carrying out different activities within the forest such as timber harvesting, killing animals for meat and grazing their cattle. Barirega et al. (2010) noticed that this option would preserve the forest on which even the humans were dependent on. They used forest products including the animals living there.

However, for the farmers to appreciate the forest and the services and resources it provides, there is a need for the locals to be educated so that they understand the mutual dependency between humans and animals. Majority of households in the villages around Mgori Forest Reserve still depend on subsistence farming for survival. They do not understand the whole concept of conservation. They need to understand that as the human beings are able to go to the forest to look for their needs like timber, mushrooms, fruits, flowers and firewood the wild animals too need to get out of the forest to search for their needs like food, sunshine, air and water. As they move to the farms they cause damage to the crops unwarily.

Barirega et al. (2010) agreed with this finding. He said that crop raiding on these three study sites was an existing problem and baboons were the major culprits. Barirega et al. (2010) in

Western Uganda found that crop raiding reduced the amount of food available for the people in a household. It also reduced the money available to buy food. In addition, crop raiding limited the range of crops people grown and consequently reduced the dietary diversity of the inhabitants.

Kagoro-Rugundo (2004) in Uganda said that crop loss had negative monetary consequences for the farmer. The extent of monetary loss depended on the feeding habits of the animal species and the type of crop.

5.1.2 Relationship between the distance of the farm and level of crop damage.

The findings showed that during the wet season the intensity of crop raiding decreased with increasing distance of the farm from the forest edge. This could be due to the fact that there were various obstacles to tackle, further away from the forest edge. Feeding on crops closer to the forest edge saves energy that could otherwise be used for travel. Also, the further they moved

44 into the farms the higher the chances of encountering the farmers who would not only chase them away but also harm them. During the period this study was conducted, two baboons were killed and hung on trees near the farms to discourage other baboons from visiting the farms.

Since baboons are fast learners, they would keep to a distance that would reduce their direct encounter with humans. Baboons were large animals they could not hide easily and were in danger of being noticed and repelled.

Results obtained in this study are similar to those obtained by Naughton-Treves (1997) who found that park edges formed a permanent ‘frontier’ where wildlife habitat met agriculture or other intensive human land uses. The human-wildlife conflict at the edge of Mgori forest reserve served as a vivid example of one of the greatest dilemmas in contemporary conservation, namely balancing global environmental conservation goals with local residents’ concerns. Kagoro-

Rugundo (2004) found the situation to be similar in Uganda. Subsistence farmers grew maize and sugar cane around the park. The fields were easily accessible to wildlife. Saj et al. (2001) in

Uganda found that corn (Zea mays L), sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas L), bananas (Musa spp), mangoes (Mangifera indica L), peanuts (Arachis hypogea L) and yams (Colocasia esculenta L) were most likely going to be damaged by baboons foraging in the forest than in the farms. Olive baboons could not venture far away from the forest if they found enough food where they live.

However, they could travel further if the need arises, but most of the time they used to stay within ½ kilometres from their natural habitat. They did most of the damage within 100 metres from the forest edge, since they could escape quickly in case of any danger. Incidences of crop raiding from 200 - 300 metres away from the forest edge were few and far between. However, farmers were often forced to farm at the forest edge due to land scarcity (Naughton - Treves et

45 al., 1998), where they were prohibited from hunting and consequently wild animals damage their crops.

The distance between the farm and the forest edge was the most important indicator of the expected level of destruction of the crops on the farms around Mgori forest reserve. When there was only a short distance between the farm and the forest edge, crop raiding by Olive baboons occurred frequently. As this distance was increased, the frequency and the magnitude of crop raiding events decreased. Farms more than 500 metres away from the forest edge, did not suffer from any raiding at all. Farms close to the forest experienced more baboon attacks than those further away. This probably because baboons could not walk long distances in order to get food since they could satisfy their appetite with what they found in the forest.

During the dry seasons there was no relationship between distance and level of damage. This can be attributed to the fact that at this time the crops are already harvested and so probably they would benefit more by foraging in the forest than in the farms.

5.1.3 The crops preferred by Olive baboons in the wet and dry seasons

Damage caused by baboons was higher in the wet than in the dry season. Damage was greatest just before and during the harvesting period when crops were mature. The dry season was characterized by very little crop losses because most of the crops had been harvested and stored.

Therefore baboons helped themselves with the leftovers in the farms. Olive baboons walked long distances in the farms looking any available crops. The forest provided more food to the baboons than did the farms. When in the field baboons dug uproots or seeds sawn in the dry season due to scarcity of crops in the field.

Results obtained in this study agree with those observed elsewhere. Warren (2008) in West

Africa found that in 2002 maize raiding at Gamgam in Nigeria occurred just prior to harvesting period in February/March. Baboons were picking bananas and scavenging on harvested maize and sweet potatoes fields. There was a significant increase in raids during these two months compared to the rest of the year. Naughton-Treves (1996) in Western Uganda reported that 38% of farmers claimed that maize was the crop most prone to damage. In fact, this crop suffered damage twice as much than what people expected. Sowing is normally done prior to or during the wet season. Naughton-Treves (1998) in Western Uganda suggested that the maize planting routine of the farmers had changed the feeding habits of the baboons foraging on different crops at varying stages of maturity. This explained the broad habitat tolerance of baboons.

5.1.4 Local peoples’ perception of the nature, extent and intensity of the crop raiding

This study explored the attitude of the farmers towards the conservation of Olive baboons, considering the impact the latter have on the farmers’ income generating activities in the villages adjacent to the Mgori Forest Reserve, Singida. The community of farmers around Mgori Forest

Reserve was aware of the fact that the forest was a source of livelihoods for them. The forest was rich in wildlife and natural vegetation. This biodiversity was beneficial to the peoples’ lives.

They understood that the forest provided various products they could harvest. They were able to obtain firewood, timber, honey, local medicines, fibres, game, and much more. In addition, the community received a share of revenue from the tourists. Despite these benefits, farmers still wanted to cultivate crops near the forest edge. As discussed earlier, this results in human baboon conflict and farmers resented the loss of crops due to raiding. This was manifested by some of

47 the methods used by farmers to try and prevent raiding. Some of the methods resulted in the death of the baboons.

Baboons raided fields which were poorly protected. The more frequent the baboons raided the farms the greater was the loss of crops. This caused great distress to the farmer as he depended on the crops to take care of his family. To protect their crops from damage, farmers employed various methods among them guarding. The task of guarding the farms needed close and effective cooperation between the local community and the government. Various protective strategies were employed to assist this task.

Baboons are part of this ecosystem and their natural food is to be found in the forest and they must play an important ecological role not apparent to the farmers. Most of the time they fed on wild fruits, seeds, mushrooms, flowers, leaves and the stems of various plants. However, the forested areas were shrinking in size hence could not provide enough food for them anymore.

Baboons were very mobile animals and could travel long distances in troops of animals. They could even reach the farms that were far away from the forest edge. As the baboons travelled from the forest reserve edge to the farms, they realized that it was much easier to obtain their food from the farms than foraging in the forest alone. The farmers would not understand this complex relationship and their attitude to the baboons is negative.

Farmers did not mind baboons as long as they stayed in the forest. They were even proud of them, but when they entered their farms and raid their crops, they became unwelcome. For the baboons and humans to continue to coexist in Mgori, there is a need for the locals to be educated so that they understand the mutual dependency between humans, forest and animals. The

48 majority of households in the villages around Mgori forest reserve still depend on subsistence farming for survival. They do not understand conservation. They need to understand that as the human beings are able to go to the forest to satisfy for their needs like timber, mushrooms, fruits, flowers and firewood, animals are also able to get out of the forest to search for their needs like food, sunshine, air and water. As they move to the farms they cause damage to the crops unwarily. To maintain the forest they needed people who were to be employed as forest guards, educators and trainers.

It is essential that farmers were involved in the process of solving conflicts. When wildlife destroyed crops or damaged property, the pressure from the farmers to rectify the problem on wildlife authorities could be great. Farmers generally felt that wildlife managers were responsible for crop losses and expected some form of compensation. If farmers were not involved in the process of solving the conflict between humans and animals they felt powerless.

They showed their anger by sabotaging the government or foreign-funded development projects and they killed the baboons. The farmers themselves were to take responsibility for their own crop protection and not leave it to the government.

Several African countries had tried another method to address the human-baboon conflict. They formed a conflict resolution committee comprised of representatives from the communities, the local and central government, wildlife authorities, local NGO’s and some other relevant partners.

The major role of the committee was to form a partnership between all stakeholders to address the human baboon conflicts in the local area.

Barirega et al. (2010) believed that people did not understand the value of conservation because of their low level of education. This calls for appropriate conservation education of the farmers.

Naughton-Treves (1998) found that indirect costs were also associated with the farmers’ investment in guarding their fields, such as the need for additional labour. The use of children would cause the next generation to be uneducated again. Children stayed away from school in order to guard fields, which added to the problem of producing uneducated adults.

Muoria (2001) in his study at Arabuko – Sokoke Forest in the coastal region of Kenya found that, forests are a good source of timber and a variety of non – timber products. He further found that forests are a reservoir of Bio – resources for agriculture, pharmaceutical and other industrial applications. Muoria also added that forests play roles in nutrient recycling, regulation of climate, maintenance of soil fertility and they protect water catchment areas. This calls for farmers to protect the natural resources for they complement their life. Treating these resources in a disorderly manner will lead to serious imbalances of nature and cause a serious shortage of these resources to man and hence deteriorate his life.

Despite the annoying behaviour of the baboons, Goldman and Hartter (2009) in Uganda found that most people in the east (71%) and in the west (54%) believed that the park benefited them.

In Kibale, however, only a small proportion of the respondents indicated that they considered the park useful. Only 6% felt that the tourist revenue benefited them, 14% acknowledged that the park provided employment and a mere 6% could see any improvement of educational infrastructure facilities.

The attitude of farmers in Mgori towards baboon is not specific to this community. According to

Goldman and Hartter (2009) in the northern part of Uganda, responses were somewhat different.

Only 31% of farmers reported crop raiding and yet 21% did not resent having a game reserve in the neighbourhood. Very few people felt they benefited from them (l0%), and only 38% felt that parks are important. One third of respondents believed that parks benefited the communities, and

43% of them believed that parks diminished their livelihood. This perception might differ from one place to another depending on the climate and geographical position of the area where study is being conducted and that time.

Barirega et al. (2010) in Western Uganda found that people there had a similar attitude, perhaps because most people living adjacent to a park were uneducated. Gillingham and Lee (2003) in

Tanzania interviewed 198 households and found that 95.5% of them reported that crop raiding diminished their agricultural output and 34.8% of respondents ranked this as the primary constraint to their agricultural productivity.

Goldman and Hartter (2009) in Uganda found that, 82% of farmers in the east and 70% of them in the west of these study areas reported problems with crop raiding by wild animals. In the north, a smaller proportion, only 31% of respondents reported problems with wildlife. Farmers believed that it was the park's or the central government's responsibility to deal with these animals, (82% in the east and 75% in the west). But, since, neither organization seemed to do anything, Goldman and Hartter (2009) in Uganda found that; 86% felt that each household was entitled to find its own solution to mitigate wildlife problems. Despite the fact that 71% of them attended primary School and 29% continued with further studies, they did not see the benefit of wildlife and game reserves. In Uganda, 56% were subsistence farmers and 44% farmed

51 commercially. Some farmers (30%) thought that guarding their farms might reduce crop raiding.

Linkie (2006) in Sumatra however found, that only a minority of farmers employed some form of crop protection (30%), 24% of them had a dog and the other 6% a gun.

Naughton - Treves (1996) in Uganda stated that more than half of the respondents (56%) identified wildlife protection as the central purpose of the park. Yet the popular belief (40%) in

Kibale was that the park only profited the government. 35% of farmers thought that forests might improve the amount of rainfall, 25% thought it provided revenue from foreign tourists. 84% of respondents thought that the park benefited them, but only to collect firewood (44%) and building materials (28%), which were both illegal activities in that area. 12% mentioned various other benefits to the communities.

5.1.4.1 The methods used to mitigate crop raiding by Olive baboons and their effectiveness.

Crops on farms needed to be protected from the time they were planted until they were harvested. The farmer guarded the farm throughout the season and could only relax when the crop had been harvested and stored at home in an appropriate container and in a proper place.

This activity was repeated every year. This means that, time that could have been used for other important activities was spent guarding farms.

To ensure crop security the farmer guarded his farm from early in the morning (6:00 am) to late in the evening (6:00 pm). These were the hours when Olive baboons visited the farms for feeding. The farmer had to make sure that the baboons could not enter the farm during the day whether it was morning, afternoon or evening hours. Different methods were used to chase the baboons. These included the use of dogs, school children and people with bows and arrows.

Some farmers killed the wild animals, others used poison, some made loud noises, some used masks and some used traps to catch the animals. Some of the methods were more effective than others. The protection method depended on the location of the farm and the capability of the farmer. However, no one method was 100% effective on its own and so farmers used a combination of methods.

The findings of this study matched those of Naughton-Treves (1998) in Uganda. 60% of the farmers preferred guarding to eliminate crop loss, 50% suggested to create a buffer zone at the forest edge, 15% wanted to place snares, traps, or poisoned bait in their fields (15%) and 4% wanted to abandon cultivation of their farms altogether. Kagoro-Rugundo (2004) in Uganda found that guarding reduced the crop loss by 25–35%.

In West Africa, Warren (2008) found that guarding reduced the crop raiding by 54% in the wet season (N = 13) and by 44% in the dry season (N = 32). The most effective way of dealing with baboons was to shout at them (47% of farmers used this method). This method was sometimes combined with using a sling shot (24% of farmers did that). Some farmers also hurled stones at them (19%). However the baboons were never hit by any of the weapons used. About 38% of farmers just chased the animals away. Kagoro-Rugundo (2004) in Uganda found that using children was inappropriate because they missed school hours chasing baboons.

Naughton-Treves (1996) in Uganda reported that 78% of the 145 respondents used guarding as their major defensive method, only 3.4% erected a fence, 1.4% built trenches, 1.4% set traps, and

0.7% used poison to kill the animals. Warren’s research (2008) in West Africa produced similar results. The time baboons spent in fields varied according to the crop being raided and farmers’

53 actions. Crop raiding by baboons, caused over USD 1,500,000 in agricultural damage per year and extensive trapping for export to be used in the biomedical trade was considered the only effective way to control the population size and reduce the damage to the farms.

Saj et al. (2001) in Uganda found that, in Entebbe, the most common preventive measures were attempts to scare and chase Olive baboons away by various means. Saj et al. (2001) reported that in Uganda farmers grew different less vulnerable crops. Farms owners did not vary their preventive methods according to the distance from the forest. Farms 100 metres away from the forest edge which were not affected by crop raiding at the present moment but had been in the past used the same methods to chase the baboons as other farmers whose farms were raided by baboons at the present moment.

Naughton-Treves (1998) in Uganda found that crop damage was less frequent in villages where farmers set more traps, snares or poisoned baits in their fields. Wallace and Hill (2012) in

Western Uganda found that baboons were quite adaptable. They might change the timing of their raids, the type of crop they raided and at which developmental state they destroyed it, thus becoming more problematic as time goes on.

Barirega et al. (2010) found that the mere existence of Queen Elizabeth National Park reduced the household income of the locals by up to 14% annually. Funds were to be established to mitigate the cost of crop raiding. This could be achieved by digging trenches along the forest edge, crop rotation and training people to guard crops effectively or creating buffer zones around the forest. Protected buffer habitats needed to be included in the management plans when a

54 reserve was being established. This suggests that money should be directed toward needs-based crop raiding mitigation interventions.

5.2 Conclusions

a) At least eleven types of crops were grown in the area around the Mgori forest reserve.

Baboons preferred maize, millet, sunflowers and finger millet. This resulted in loss food

security and revenue more so because these are the major crops grown both for

subsistence and as cash crops.

b) The farms close to the forest edge suffered more damage than those far from the forest.

Beyond 500 metres damage was negligible. Therefore the distance between the farm and

the forest edge was the most important indicator of the expected level of destruction of

the crops on the farms around Mgori forest reserve. However, during the dry season

Olive baboons walked long distances in the farms looking for crops to eat though this

movement was not related with the distance from the forest edge. Despite the great loss

of crops close to the forest edge, farmers continue encroaching on the forest thus

increasing the chances of crop raiding. There were no other direct benefits or revenue

coming from the forest to the community especially from efforts from the government.

c) Baboons frequented the farms during the rainy season because at this season there were

food crops in the farms. So most of the damage was in the wet season. Little loss was

recorded in the dry season probably because all the crops had been harvested and stored

in the store houses.

d) There were several strategies employed by the farmers to mitigate crop raiding but the

most common and effective was guarding. This involved a lot of energy that could

otherwise be directed to more gainful activities. For guarding to be more effective, the

farms needed close and effective cooperation between the local community and the

government with the latter providing information that would see the exercise to be guided

by facts. Farmers’ perception of damage caused by baboons may not necessarily agree

with the actual damage thus mitigation methods may not necessarily be based on the

actual threat caused.

e) Local people had a negative attitude towards the baboons due to the damage they caused.

They did not understand the role of the baboons as part of the Mgori ecosystem and the

real value of conservation because of their low level of education and the complexity of

the issue.

5.3 Recommendations

5.3.1 Recommendations from the Study

a) No crop vulnerable to baboon raiding should be planted within 500 metres from the forest

edge. Farmers should be advised to only plant crops near the forest edge, which are not

favoured by the baboons namely, tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L), peppers (Capsicum)

and euphorbia species.

b) Farmers should be educated so that they can understand the mutual dependency between

humans, animals and the forest. Hopefully this would reduce farmers encroaching on the

forest.

c) More effective mitigation methods should be employed by the farmers and in

collaboration with the government. The government is in a better position to recommend

and implement better protection methods such as erecting a metal or electric fence, or

digging a trench around the forest reserve.

d) The government through the relevant ministries should ensure that farmers benefit from

the revenue generated from the Mgori Forest Reserve and also compensate farmers for

crop loss so as to encourage the farmers to change their attitude towards the wildlife and

tolerate them in their farms.

e) It is good to form a conflict resolution committee that comprise of representatives from

the communities, the local and central government, wildlife authorities, local NGO’s and

some other relevant partners and form a partnership between all stakeholders to address

the human baboon conflicts in the local area.

5.3.2 Recommendations for further research:

i) Long term monitoring of various troops of Olive baboons in terms of their variation

in size and home range and how this will add to the conflicts with locals in the

adjacent community.

ii) Changing feeding habits of Olive baboons due to the interaction with humans.

REFERENCES

Altmann, J., Hausfater, G. and Altmann, S.A. (1985). Demography of Amboseli Baboons, 1963–1983. American Journal of Primatology 8:113–125.

Andelman, J. S., Else, G. J., Hearn, P. J. and Hodges, K. J. (1985).The Non-invasive Monitoring of Reproductive Events in Wild Vervet Monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops) Using Urinary Pregnediol-3α-glucuronide and its Correlation With Behavioural Observations. Journal of Zoology 205:467-477.

Baillie, J. E. M., Hilton-Taylor, C. and Stuart, S. N. (2004). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland.

Barirega, A., Buyinza, M., Kansiime, F. and Basuta-Isabirye, G. (2010). The Effects of Crop Raiding on Household Food Security in the Albertine Rift: A Case Study of Queen Elizabeth National Park, Western Uganda, Human Dimensions of Wildlife. An International Journal 15:1, 45-54, DOI: 10.1080/10871200903115070

Barnes, J. (2009). Mount Kenya Ecology and Environment Booklet for Schools and Education Centers. African Fund for Endangered Wildlife, Kenya.

Barrett, S. A. (2005). Foraging Ecology of Vervet Monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops) in Mixed and Sour Lowveld Bushveld of the Blydeberg Conservancy, Northern Province, South Africa. Unpublished MSc Thesis, University of South Africa. Pretoria.

Beehner, J.C., Onderdonk, D.A., Alberts, S.C. and Altmann, J. (2006). The Ecology of Conception and Pregnancy Loss in Wild Baboons. Behavioural Ecology 17:741–750.

Bolter, D. and Zihlman, A. (2003). Morphometric Analysis of Growth and Development in Wild-collected Vervet Monkeys(Cercopithecus aethiops), With Implications for Growth Patterns Across Old World Monkeys, Apes, and Humans Journal of Zoology 260:99-110.

Boobyer, D. (2013). Second Chance at Being Wild: One Person Making a Difference for Africa’s Primates. Nikela Publishers. Pretoria. Boulton, M. A., Horrocks, A. J. and Baulu, J. (1996). The Barbados Vervet Monkey (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus): Changes in Population Size and Crop Damage. International Journal of Primatology 17:1980-1994

Cardini, A., Dunn, J., O’Higgins, P. and Elton, S. (2013). Clines in Africa: Does Size Vary in the Same Way Among Wide Spread Sub-Saharan Monkeys? Journal of Biogeography 20:2,370-381. DOI:10.1111/;1365-2699.2012.02783.x

Chapman, A. C. (1987). Selection of Secondary Growth Areas by Vervet Monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops). American Journal of Primatology 12:217-221.

Fisher, A. A., Laing, J., Stoeckel, J. E. and Towsend, J. W. (1998). Handbook for Family Planning Operations Research Designs (2nd edition). New York: The Population Council.

Foord, H. S., van Aarde, J. R. and Ferreira, M. S. (1994). Seed Dispersal by Vervet Monkeys in Rehabilitating Coastal Dune Forests at Richards Bay, Suid-Afrikaanse. Tydskrif van Natuurnavorsing 24: 56-59

Gillingham, S. and Lee, C. P. (2003). People and Protected Areas: a Study of Local Perceptions of Wildlife Crop-Damage conflict in an Area Bordering the Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania. Oryx 37:316- 325.

Goldman, C. A. and Hartter, J. (2009). Life on the Edge: Balancing Biodiversity, I Conservation, and Sustaining Rural Livelihoods around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Summer 2009 FOCUS on Geography 52:27-47.

Grobler, P., Jacquier, M., deNys, H., Blair, M., Whitten, P. L. and Turner, T. R. (2006). "Primate Sanctuaries,Taxonomy and Survival: a Case Study from South Africa" Ecological and Environmental Anthropology. University of Georgia.

Groves, C. (2001). Primate Taxonomy. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institute Press.

Higham, J. P., Warren, Y., Adanu, J., Umaru, B. N., Maclarnon, A. N., Sommer, V. and Ross, C. (2009). Living on the Edge: Life-History of Olive Baboons at Gashaka- Gumti National Park, Nigeria. American Journal of Primatology 71:1–12.

Hill, C. M. (1965). Primates: Comparative Anatomy and Taxonomy. Volume VI. University Press, Edinburgh.

Hill, C. M. (2000). Conflict of Interest Between People and Baboons: Crop Raiding in Uganda. International Journal of Primatology 21: 2, 2000.

Hill, C. M. (2005). People, Crops, and Primates, a Conflict of Interest. In J. D. Patterson and J. Wallis (Eds.). Commensalism and Conflict: The Human-Primate Interface (pp. 40- 59). Norman: American Society of Primatologists.

Hoffman, T. S. and O'Riain, M. J. (2012). Monkey Management: Using Spatial Ecology to Understand the Extent and Severity of Human–Baboon Conflict in the Cape Peninsula, South Africa. Ecology and Society 17:13. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org. on 12/02/2015.

Isbell, L. A., Pruetz, J. D., Lewis, M. and Young, T. P. (1999). Rank Differences in Ecological Behaviour: A Case Study of Patas Monkeys (Erythrocebus patas) and Vervets (Cercopithecus aethiops). International Journal of Primatology 20: 2, 1999.

Jasinska, J. A., Schmitt, A. C., Nelson, B. and Freimer, B. N. (2013). Systems Biology of the Vervet Monkey. ILAR Journal 54:122-143.

Johnson, C. A., Swedell, L. and Rothman, J. M. (2012). Feeding Ecology of Olive Baboons (Papio anubis) in Kibale National Park, Uganda: Preliminary Results on Diet and Food Selection. African Journal of Ecology 50: 367–370.

Kagoro- Rugundo, G. (2004). Crop Raiding Around Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda. African Journal of Ecology 42:32-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.0141-6707.2004.00444.x

Kate, K. (2012). Possible Strategies/Practices in Reducing Wild Animal (Primate) Crop Raids in Unprotected Areas in Hoima District. A Report to the PCLG-Uganda.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques (2nd Revised Edition). New Age Techno Press. New Delhi, India.

Lavigne, S. (2009). Monkeying Around Spacial Differences in Riverine Habitat Utilization by Vervets, Sykes, and Baboons. SIT Tanzania.

Lee, C. P. and Priston, C. E. (2005). Human Attitudes to Primates: Perceptions of Pests, Conflict and Consequences for Primate Conservation: Department of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, UK.

Linkie, M., Dinata, Y., Nofrianto, A. and Leader- Williams, N. (2006). Patterns and Perceptions of Wildlife Crop Raiding in and Around Kerinci Seblat National Park, Sumatra. Animal Conservation 10 : 127–135.

Lubbe, A. (2013). Thermoregulatory Plasticity in Free-Ranging Vervet Monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus). Unpublished MSc Thesis: University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.

Luhajo, P. (2002). Tanzania: Destroying Cheap Forests to Buy Expensive Water in, News From Africa: retrieved from http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica. on 05/12/2014.

Lycett, J.E., Weingrill, T. and Henzi, S.P. (1999). Birth Patterns in the Drakensberg Mountain Baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus). South Africa Journal of Science 95:354–357.

Makin, F. D., Payne, P. F. H., Kerley, H. I. G. and Shrader, M. A. (2012). Foraging in a 3D World: How Does Predation Risk Affect Space Use of Vervet Monkeys? Journal of Mammalogy 93 : 422-428.

McDaniel, M. (2004). Animals: Monkeys. Benchmark Books. Marsha Cavendish, New York.

McDougall, L. K., Alexander, M. J., Haider, S., Pauchard, A., Walsh, G.N. and Kueffer,

C. (2011). Alien Flora of Mountains: Global Comparisons for the Development of Local Preventive Measures Against Plant Invasions. Diversity and Distributions: A Journal of Conservation Biogeography 17: 103–111. doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00713.x

McFarland, R., Fuller, A., Hetem, S. R., Mitchell, D., Henzi, P. S. and Barrett, L. (2014). Behavioural and Physiological Flexibility in Vervet Monkeys: Potential Adaptive Responses to Changing Climates. The 83rd Annual Meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists.

Mfunda, M. I. and Roskaft, E. (2011). Wildlife or Crop Production: the Dilemma of Conservation and Human Livelihoods in Serengeti, Tanzania. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 7: 39–49.

Mittermeier, R. A. and van Roosmalen, M. G. M. (1981). Preliminary Observations on Habitat Utilization and Diet in Eight Surinam Monkeys. Folia Primatologica 36:1-39.

Mugenda, O. M. and Mugenda, G. A. (1999). Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Acts Press. Nairobi.

Muoria, P. K. (2001). Ecological Correlates of Crop Raiding by Elephants and Baboons: A Case Study in Arabuko – Sokoke Forest, Kenya. Ph.D. Thesis. Kenyatta University, Nairobi.

Musendo, Z. (2002). Destroying Cheap Forests to Buy Expensive Water in News From Africa: retrieved from http://www.newsfromafrica.org/newsfromafrica on 05/12/2014.

Mwangi, P. G. (2013). The Effectiveness of Electric Fence in Mitigating Human- Elephants Conflicts in the Aberdare National Park, Kenya. Unpublished MSc Thesis. Kenyatta University. Kenya.

NBS, (2012).National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) Ministry of Finance Dar es Salaam, and Office of Chief Government Statistician President’s Office, Finance, Economy and Development Planning Zanzibar. (2013). 2012 Population and Housing Census: Population Distribution by Administrative Areas.

Naughton-Treves, L. (1996).Uneasy Neighbors; Wildlife and Farmers Around Kibale National Park, Uganda. PhD thesis: University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Naughton-Treves, L. (1997). Vulnerable Places and People Around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Geographical Review 87: 27-47.

Naughton- Treves, L. (1998). Predicting Patterns of Crop Damage by Wildlife Around Kibale National Park, Uganda in Conservation Biology 12: 156-168. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523- 1739.1998.96346.x

Naughton- Treves, L., Treves, A., Chapman, C. and Wrangham, R. (1998). Temporal

Patterns of Crop- Raiding by Primates: linking food Availability in Crop Lands and Adjacent Forest. Journal of Applied Ecology 35:596-606.

Okecha, A. A. and Newton-Fisher, N. E. (2006). The Diet of Olive Baboons (Papio anubis) in the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda. In: Newton-Fisher, Nicholas E. and Notman, Hugh and Paterson, James D. and Reynolds, Vernon, (Eds). Primates of Western Uganda. Springer, New York.

Omondi, P. (1994). Human – Wildlife Conflicts in Kenya, Integrating Wildlife Conservation With Human Needs in the Masai Mara Region. Ph.D. Thesis. McGill University Montreal.

Parker, S. P. (1983). Mammals. Grizmeks Encyclopedia, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York.

Philemon, L. (2012). “Over 1,000 `Settlers` Invade Mgori Forest Reserve”, The Guardian, Home News, IPP Media, 7th December 2012.

Porter, W. P. and Sheppard, S. E. (1998). A World of Difference: Society, Nature, Environment. The Guilford Press. New York.

Rothman, M. J., Chapman, A. C. and Van Soest, J. P. (2011). Methods in Primate Nutritional Ecology: A User’s Guide. Introduction to the Journal of Primatology 33: 542-566.

Rowell, E. T. (2014). Reproductive Cycles of Two Cercopithecus Monkeys in Reproduction : The Journal of the Society for Reproduction and Fertility 147: 6.

Rowell, T. H. and Richards S. M. (1979). Reproductive Strategies of Some African Monkeys. Journal of Mammalogy 60: 58-63.

Saj, L.T., Sicotte, P. and Paterson, D. J. (2001). The Conflict Between Vervet Monkeys and Farmers at the Forest Edge in Entebbe, Uganda. African Journal of Ecology 39 :195-199.

Siex, K. S. and Struhsaker, T. T. (1999). "Colobus Monkeys and Coconuts: A Study of Perceived Human-Wildlife Conflicts". Journal of Applied Ecology 36: 1009.

Struhsaker, T.T. (1973). A Recensus of Vervet Monkeys in the Masai-Amboseli Game Reserve, Kenya. Ecology 54: 930-932. Retrieved on May 30, 2014 from http://www.jstor.org.

Thomas, C.D., Cameron, A., Green, R.E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L.J., Collingham, Y.C., Erasmus, B.F.N., de Siqueira, M.F., Grainger, A., Hannah, L., Hughes, L., Huntley, B., van Jaarsveld, A.S., Midgley, G.F., Miles, L., Ortega-Huerta, M.A., Townsend Peterson, A., Phillips, O.L. and Williams, S.E. (2004). Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427:145-148.

Thuiller, W., Broennimann, O., Hughes, G., Alkemade, J.R.M., Midgley, G.F. and Corsi, F. (2006). Vulnerability of African Mammals to Anthropogenic Climate Change under Conservative Land Transformation Assumptions. Global Change Biology 12: 424-440.

Turner, T. R., Anapol, F. and Jolly, C. J. (1997). Growth, Development and Sexual Dimorphism in Vervet Monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops) at Four Sites in Kenya. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 103: 19-35.

Wallace, G.E. and Hill, C.M. (2012). Crop Damage by Primates: Quantifying the Key Parameters of Crop-Raiding Events. PLoS ONE 7(10).

Warren, Y., Buba, B. and Ross, C. (2007). Patterns of Crop-Raiding by Wild and Domestic Animals near Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. International Journal of Pest Management 53: 207-216. DOI:10.1080/09670870701288124

Warren, Y. (2008). Crop-Raiding Baboons (Papio anubis) and Defensive Farmers: A West African Perspective. West African Journal of Applied Ecology 14:23-28.

Warren, Y. (2009). Crop-Raiding Baboons (Papio anubis) and Defensive Farmers: A West African Perspective. West African Journal of Applied Ecology 14: 1-10. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org. on 05/01/2015.

Willems P. E. and Hill A. R. (2009). Predator- Specific Landscapes of Fear and Resource Distribution : Effects on Special Range Use. American Journal of Ecology 90: 546-555. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org. on 05/01/2015.

Wily, L. (1995). Village Forest Management Plans in Mgori Forest. Singida Rural District, Singida Region, Tanzania.

Wily, L.A. and Mbaya, S. (2001). Land People and Forests in Eastern and Southern Africa at the Beginning of the 21st Century: The Impact of Land Relations on the Role of Communities in Forest Future. IUCN-EARO, Nairobi, Kenya.

Whitten, L. P. (1983). Diet and Dominance Among Female Vervet Monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops). American Journal of Primatology 5:139-159.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I: QUESTIONNAIRES AND STRUCTURED INTERVIEW

Part I: To the peasants around Mgori forest reserve

Instructions to the researcher: Please fill the responses in the spaces provided or tick (√) where appropriate.

Number of Questionnaires form………… ………Village……………………………... Name of enumerator………………………………Date……..…………………………

Section A: Personal Details What is your age? 0-18 18-35 35-50 50-60 Above 60 Gender: Male… Female… Level of education: None Primary Secondary College Any other (specify) …………………………………………………………………………………….……….. How long have you lived in this village? (in years) Less than5 5-10 Over 10 Other (specify)………………………….. Section B: General land use activities What is your main occupation? Farming Livestock Hunting teaching civil servant other (specify …………………..………………………………………………………………………... Section C: Farming activities Do you own a farm? Yes No If yes, what is the size of your farm? (in ha) Less 5 5-10 10-15 15-20 Over 20 Section D: Crop raiding List five animals that are the most frequent crop raiders. (1) …………………(2) …………………(3)……………… (4) ………………(5) …………………

If Olive baboons are in the list proceed to the next question How often do the animals raid your farm? Never Less than once a month 1-5 times a month 5-10 times a month more than 10 times a month At what time of the day do they raid your farm? Morning Afternoon Evening Night Any time In which season of the year do baboons invade your farm? Dry Wet Both Don’t know When baboons come to the farm, how big is the troop? Less than 10 11-20 21-30 over 30 List five crops the baboons fed on: (1) ……………(2) ……………(3) …………(4) …………(5) ……….. What is the size of the farm raided in acres: 0.25…….0.5………..0.75……1.0……1.5….2.0…. Of which crop is this damage? Write the name of the crop…………………….. In the table given tick (√) the part of the crop they feed on: Plant name Part consumed Fruit Flower leaf stem Root Seed Other (specify) Maize Potatoes Beans Finger millet Pumpkins Sunflowers Sorghum Groundnuts Bambara beans Cassava

Do baboons compete with humans for other resources? a) Water b) Settlements c) Any Other (specify)

Section E: Farmers’ intervention methods Mention the types of control or mitigation you use to protect your crops: (1)………………………..…..(2)……………..………………(3)………..………………… (4)…………………………....(5)………………..…………….(6)…………..……………...

Did you receive any information on how to mitigate the damage caused by the baboons? Yes No… If your answer is yes, indicate who offered any assistance. a) Extension staff b) Forest officers c) Wildlife personnel

d) NGOs e) any other (specify)

Have you ever been trained in wildlife management and forest conservation? Yes No If yes specify who trained you…………………………… Section F: Peoples’ attitude towards the animals What do you want the government to do with the baboons? a) Nothing

b) Ensure that they remain in the forest and not come to the farms

c) They should be removed and taken to other areas

d) Allow the farmers to decide what to do with them

Do baboons benefit the farmers in anyway? No Yes do not know Should Olive baboons continue living in your habitat? Yes No If yes, why? ………………………………………………………………………………… What advice would you give to the responsible institutions about the forest and wildlife conservation at MFR? ...... ………………………………………………………………………………………………… Thank you for your cooperation.

Part II: To the Village leaders, agriculture extension workers and wildlife officers

Instructions: Please fill the responses in the spaces provided or tick (√) where appropriate. Number of Questionnaires form ………………Village …………………………… Name of enumerator ………………..Date ……………………………

Section A: Personal Details Gender: Male… Female… Level of education: None Primary Secondary College Any other (specify) …………………………………………………………………………………….……….. Which position are you holding in the village/organization? a) Village leader……. b) Agricultural officer……… c) Wildlife/forest officer……. d) any other (Specify)…………………………………………………………..

How long have you been in your current position? (in years( less than 5 5-10 over 10 Other (specify)…………………………………….. Section B: Crop raiding List five animals that are the most frequent crop raiders. (1)…………………..(2)……………….(3)………………………….(4)……………………. (5)………………………… If Olive baboons are in the list proceed to the next question How often do baboons raid and eat farm crops? ( times per month) never ….. less than 1..…1-5 .…. 5-10 ..… more than 10 ...... What time of the day do these animals raid the farms? morning………afternoon………evening…..………… In which season of the year do the animals invade their farms? dry……….wet..…….. List five crops they feed on. 1)………………..2) …………………,3) ………………4) …….………5)…………….. Part C: Farmers’ mitigation methods List the methods that are used by farmers to protect their crops:

(1)…………………….(2)…..………………….(3)…………………… (4)…………………….(5)……………………...(6)…………………… Part D: Peoples’ attitude towards the Olive baboon Are you aware of the benefits of these animals to the farmers? Yes……No…… If yes, what are they? 1) ……………………………, 2)………………………………3)…………………………. Should Olive baboon continue living in this habitat? Yes..…No….. If yes, why?...... What efforts has the following institutions done to mitigate the human baboon conflict? a) Forest managers…………………………………………………………………

b) Wildlife officers…………………………………………………………………

c) Village leaders………………………………………………………………….

d) Agricultural officers…………………………………………………………….

Any other (specify)……………………………………………………………………..

Thank you for your cooperation.

Part III: Meetings and discussion with Village leaders

Instructions: Please volunteer and participate freely in this meeting or discussion as the researcher is going to guide you. This information is a secret and it is meant only for research purposes and it is not going to be disclosed to any other person. Number of Questionnaires form ………………Village …………………………… Name of enumerator ………………..Date …………………………… Do you have the problem of crop raiding animals in the village farms? If Yes! Which animals do raid your farms? In which season do they raid your farms? At which time of the day do they raid your farms? Which crops are raided by these animals? Which crops are not raided by these animals? In which season the raiding is too high? Why do they raid mostly in this season? What is the size of crop damage? Where do these animals live? Have you ever tried to protect your farms against these animals? If Yes! Which methods were used to protect your farms? What is the effectiveness of these methods in protecting the farms against the crop raiding animals? Have you ever presented the problem of crop raiding by wild animals to the District/Region government? If Yes! What was the government’s reaction to your suggestion? How do you see the number of these animals as the time goes on? What is your opinion to the life trend of these animals? What is your suggestion to the villagers about these animals which are raiding their farms? Thank you for your cooperation.

APPENDIX II: DATA COLLECTION

CHECK FORM ON THE FARMS AROUND MGORI FOREST RESERVE

FORM NO.….DATE………...……SEASON……………LOCATION………….………… PHASE………NAME OF RESEARCHER………………………….……………………… GPS: Altitude………..Coordinates: (X)………...... (Y)………………......

a) Distance of the farm from forest buffer zone to farms: 1km….2km…Other (specify)………. b) Farm size in ha………………………………………………… c) Type of animal raiding the farm: Olive baboon… Vervet monkey… Other (specify)…………………….…… d) Level of crop damage: Less than 10%...... 10-20%...... Other (specify)……………………………… e) Time of raiding: Morning………….. Afternoon……….… Evening….…Other…………….………….... f) Number of plants per hectare: Damaged……….Undamaged…………….. g) Damaged Crops: Crop types: 1) ……………………2) ……………………3) …………….…….. h) Part of plant damaged: Leaf……Flower……Fruit……Seed……Root…… Other…………………………. i) Stage of plant growth: Young………..Middle age …………Matured……………... j) Guarding strategies 1) …………………………2)…………………………3)…….

Crop Name Total Number Numb of crops No of days of Percentage of (damaged) of crops/ha damaged/ha damage/month damage/month

Additional information collected ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………

APPENDIX III: PLATES

(a) Pictures on crops raided at Mgori farms

i. Millet crop stored in the roof

ii. Sunflower plant damaged by Olive

baboons

iii. Damaged sorghum crop

iv. Damaged sunflower plant

(b) Pictures on the methods used to protect crops

i. A child beating an empty can to scare the baboons at Pohama village

ii. A farmer with a traditional hand club,

bow and arrow to chase away Olive

baboons

iii. The use of dogs to chase away the baboons

iv. The use of a scarecrow to scare away

Olive baboons

APPENDIX IV: DATA COLLECTED DURING THE STUDY PERIOD

4.1 Crops raided by Olive baboons CROP NAME FREQUENCY Millet 71 Sunflower 36 Maize 33 Finger millet 16 Groundnuts 5 Bambara bean 3 Sorghum 1 Pumpkins 1 Legume 1

4.2 Crops raided by Olive baboons in wet and dry seasons CROP NAME FREQUENCY WET SEASON DRY SEASON Millet 56 15 Sunflower 23 14 Maize 19 12 Finger millet 14 2 Groundnuts 3 2 Bambara bean 3 1 Sorghum 2 1 Pumpkins 1 2 Legume 1 1

4.3 Parts of the crop plants damaged by Olive baboons PLANT PART FREQUENCY Fruit 68 Seed 34 Stem 16 Root 8 Leaf 4 Whole plant 1

4.4 The total loss in revenue (US dollars) due to crop damage for all farmers CROP NAME CASH (TSHS) CASH (US DOLLARS) Maize 3,420,000.00 1521.85 Sunflower 2,300,000.00 1023.46 Millet 1,100,000.00 489.48 Groundnuts 168,000.00 74.76 Finger millet 140,000.00 62.3 Sorghum 60,000.00 26.7

4.5 Crop raiding animals recorded in the field ANIMAL NAME FREQUENCY OF RAIDING WET SEASON DRY SEASON Baboon 91 30 Vervet Monkey 7 10 Kudu 6 2 Gazelle 2 3 Elephant 1 0 Mongoose 1 3 Warthog 1 0 Wild pig 1 2

4.6 Relationship between distance from the forest edge and level of crop damage

DISTANCE (m) DAMAGE IN WET SEASON DAMAGE IN DRY SEASON ACRES LOG ACRES ACRES LOG ACRES 50 65.81 1.82 1.1 0.04 100 32.32 1.5 1.2 0.08 150 6.97 0.84 1.3 0.11 200 12.89 1.11 1.1 0.04 250 5.68 0.75 1.3 0.11 300 17.36 1.24 1.4 0.15 350 6.76 0.83 1 0 400 2.82 0.45 1.2 0.08 450 1 0 1 0 500 2.2 0.34 1 0 550 2.67 0.43 1.3 0.11 600 1 0 1.1 0.04 650 1 0 1 0

700 1 0 1.2 0.08 750 2.31 0.36 1.4 0.15

4.7 GPS records of crop raiding incidents in seasons SEASON POHAMA VILLAGE MUGHUNGA VILLAGE UNYAMPANDA VILLAGE WET 950 350 7400 820 450 7490 480 200 6760 860 600 7250 290 320 7350 220 480 7550 DRY 1300 900 7700 1000 1400 7900 1600 800 8000 1100 900 7600 1500 1200 7850 1400 1300 7750

4.8 Various methods used to reduce the human baboon conflict in Mgori area, Singida.

METHOD WET DRY Guarding 66 0 Chasing 56 0 Dogs 31 1 Killing 15 1 Scarecrow 12 0 Bow and arrow 9 1 Hand club 7 1 Traps 4 1 Poisoning 2 0 Can bombs 2 0 Fire 1 0

4.9 Farmers’ opinion on the crops damaged by the Olive baboons

CROP NAME FREQUENCY DAMAGE IN ACRES Maize 71 14 Millet 68 30 Sunflower 55 7

Finger millet 47 12 Groundnuts 26 2 Sorghum 24 2 Sweet potatoes 16 3 Pumpkins 7 1 Beans 6 1 Bambara bean 5 1 Cassava 3 1

4.10 Farmers’ opinions on the wild animals involved in crop raiding in Mgori.

ANIMAL NAME NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS Olive baboon 30 Wild pig 27 Vervet monkey 26 Elephant 24 Kudu 22 Dik-dik 8 African wild dog 4 Porcupine 2 Impala 2 Klipspringer 1

4.11 Actual estimate and perceived levels of crop damage

ACTUAL DAMAGE PERCEIVED DAMAGE 0.8 1.2 0.77 3 0.72 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.25 0.1 0.18 0.3

4.12 Olive baboons troop size during the wet and dry season

VILLAGE SEASON WET DRY Pohama 33 13 Mughunga 20 12 Unyampanda 43 30

4.13 The time of Olive baboons to visit the farms

TIME FREQUENCY WET DRY Morning 41 5 Afternoon 33 2 Evening 16 6

4.14 Data Collected in each village

(a) Mughunga Village Farms during rainy season

DISTANCE DAMAGE SEASON FARM GPS ( UTM UPS 36 X-0734797 FROM FOREST(M) (ACRE) Y-9459061) 50 1.46 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 100 9.05 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 150 2.74 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 200 1.69 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 250 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 300 5.88 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 350 0.92 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 400 0.75 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 450 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 500 2.87 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 550 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 600 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 650 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 700 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926 750 0.0 RAIN MUGHUNGA 0734458 9458926

(b) Mughunga Village farms during dry season DISTANCE DAMAGE SEASON FARM GPS ( UTM UPS 36 X- FROM FOREST(M) (ACRE) 0734797 Y-9459061) 50 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 100 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 150 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 200 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 250 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 300 0.1 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 350 0.1 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 400 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675

450 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 500 0.8 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 550 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 600 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 650 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 700 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675 750 0.0 DRY MUGHUNGA 0733766 9458675

(c) Unyampanda village farms during rainy season DISTANCE DAMAGE SEASON FARM GPS ( UTM UPS 36 X- FROM FOREST(M) (ACRE) 0734797 Y-9459061) 50 24.48 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 100 13.03 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 150 0.99 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 200 1.51 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 250 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 300 3.71 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 350 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 400 0.24 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 450 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 500 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 550 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 600 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 650 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 700 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394 750 0.0 RAIN UNYAMPANDA 0726511 9459394

(d) Unyampanda village farms during dry season DISTANCE DAMAGE SEASON FARM GPS ( UTM UPS 36 X- FROM FOREST(M) (ACRE) 0734797 Y-9459061) 50 0.05 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 100 0.2 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 150 0.3 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 200 0.09 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 250 0.3 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 300 0.4 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 350 0.0 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 400 0.2 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 450 0.0 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 500 0.0 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 550 0.3 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 600 0.1 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 650 0.0 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 700 0.0 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012 750 0.4 DRY UNYAMPANDA 0728401 9460012

(e) Pohama village farms during rainy season DISTANCE DAMAGE SEASON FARM GPS ( UTM UPS 36 X- FROM FOREST(M) (ACRE) 0734797 Y-9459061) 50 35.99 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 100 15.91 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 150 0.68 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 200 5.06 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 250 3.58 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 300 4.54 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 350 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 400 0.24 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 450 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 500 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 550 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 600 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 650 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 700 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832 750 0.0 RAIN POHAMA 0738402 9471832

(f) Pohama village farms during dry season DISTANCE DAMAGE SEASON FARM GPS ( UTM UPS 36 X- FROM FOREST(M) (ACRE) 0734797 Y-9459061) 50 0.01 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 100 0.03 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 150 0.01 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 200 0.02 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 250 0.08 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 300 0.02 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 350 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 400 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 450 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 500 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 550 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 600 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 650 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 700 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471 750 0.0 DRY POHAMA 0737922 9472471