Conflicts Between Humans and Wild Animals in and Surrounding

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Ethnobiology and Conservation 2020, 9:5 (27 February 2020) doi:10.15451/ec2020-02-9.05-1-22 ISSN 22384782 ethnobioconservation.com Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach Jade Silva dos Santos1,2; Joanison Vicente dos Santos Teixeira2,3; Deyna Hulda Arêas Guanaes1; Wesley Duarte da Rocha1; Alexandre Schiavetti2,4

ABSTRACT

Conflicts between humans and wildlife have been considered a huge obstacle to the management and conservation of fauna, and also lead to negative impacts for local populations. For this reason, from an ethnozoological perspective, the present work aimed to identify and analyze conflicts between farmers and the wild fauna in four communities of the Costa de ItacaréSerra Grande Environmental Protection Area, Bahia, Brazil, as well as diagnose the control measures used. The participants were selected using the snowball technique and data were collected using semistructured interviews, complemented by free listing techniques, nonspecific prompting, and reading back. Thirtyeight farmers were interviewed and they reported 45 species of wild animals, among which 23 were mammals, 17 were birds and 5 were reptiles. Conflicts were classified into five categories. Of these categories, animalcultivation and animallivestock interactions had the highest number of reported species. The farmers applied different control measures, including defensive methods, which are the most frequently used in the communities, offensive methods, and superstitious rituals. Positive interactions were also identified, in which some species are considered charismatic or recognized for their ecological role. Conflicts with wild fauna are recurrent in these communities; thus, it is necessary to guarantee social participation in the construction of effective strategies for conflict mitigation and fauna conservation.

Keywords: Farmers; Protected Areas; Conservation; Ethnozoology.

1 Programa de PósGraduação em Desenvolvimento Regional e Meio Ambiente, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Rodovia Jorge Amado, Km 16, Bairro Salobrinho, Ilhéus, Bahia CEP 45662900, Brazil.

2 Laboratório de Etnoconservação e Áreas Protegidas (LECAP), Departamento de Ciências Agrárias e Ambientais, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Rodovia Jorge Amado, Km 16, Bairro Salobrinho, Ilhéus, Bahia CEP 45662900, Brazil.

3 Programa de PósGraduação em Zoologia, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Rodovia Jorge Amado, Km 16, Bairro Salobrinho, Ilhéus, Bahia CEP 45662900, Brazil.

4 Associate Investigator CESIMAR, CENPAT, Chubut, Argentina.

* Corresponding author. E‐mail address: Santos, J.A ([email protected]) INTRODUCTION can acquire different meanings, ranging from utilitarian values, such as food and The interaction human cultures have with zootherapy, to the establishment of fauna is one of the basic connections emotional, spiritual, and symbolic between humans and the environment connections (Alves 2012; Hunn 2011; Roca (Marques 1995). In a local context, animals and Corona 2017).

1 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Attitudes and behaviors directed to fauna areas, although it tends to be more frequent are molded by the range of values, when there is spatial overlap of resource use knowledge, and perceptions, as well as the between humans and wild fauna, which is nature of the relationships between people common around protected areas (Distefano and animals (Drews 2002). Moreover, 2005; Pettigrew et al. 2012). interactions between humans and wildlife Farmers and populations in several parts are not always evaluated as harmonic, and, of the world, such as Africa (Braga et al. on some occasions, may trigger conflicts in 2016; Dunham et al. 2010), North America which animals are considered competitors or (GarciaAlaniz et al. 2010; Poudyal et al. harmful to human populations (Alves 2012; 2017), South America (Marchini and Alves and Souto 2015). Human Wildlife Crawshaw 2015; Mendonça et al. 2011), Conflict (HWC) occurs when animal Asia (Senthilkumar et al. 2016; Pettigrew et behaviors and needs negatively impact al. 2012) and Europe (Babai et al. 2017), human interests, and vice versa, generating have been suffering negative impacts in the damage or losses to one or both sides breeding and raising of domesticated (Distefano 2005; Madden 2004). animals due to conflicts with wildlife. This problem is one of the main In Brazil, the frequency, intensity, diversity challenges to fauna management and and geographic range of these conflicts conservation. Furthermore, it is an obstacle increased in the last decade (Marchini and to conservation biology when the answer to Crawshaw 2015). Marshall et al. (2007) point conflicts is the lethal control of the species out the importance of interdisciplinary involved (Dickman 2010; Kaltenborn et al. approaches, considering social factors, to 2006). In most cases, losses resulting from comprehend HWC and develop sustainable damage caused by animals can lead to solutions. This subject, however, has been intolerance of people to wildlife poorly explored from an ethnobiological (Senthilkumar et al. 2016). Similarly, HWC viewpoint (Schulz et al. 2014). directly and negatively affects human well Thus, from an ethnozoological being, health, and safety, and entails social perspective, the present study aimed to and economic costs (Distefano 2005; identify and analyze conflicts between the Madden 2008). Several anthropic factors local population and wild animals in the may also increase conflicts, especially Environmental Protection Area Costa de destruction and fragmentation of habitats, ItacaréSerra Grande, Bahia, Brazil, in order transformation of land use, changes in to characterize the types of conflicts agricultural practices, population growth, and between people and wildlife, identify species expansion of human settlements inside or and control measures used and, near vegetation areas (Distefano 2005; consequently, contribute to fauna Marchini and Crawshaw 2015). conservation and management efforts. Conflicts usually emerge when animals invade or destruct crops or properties, when MATERIAL AND METHODS they attack or represent a potential risk to livestock and humans or when they transmit Study area diseases (Madden 2008; Mendonça et al. 2011). This contact between people and The Environmental Protection Area (APA animals occurs in both country and urban – Área de Proteção Ambiental, in

2 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Portuguese) Costa de ItacaréSerra Grande Environment (Figure 1). was established in 1993 by State Decree The APA is included in a region where the No. 2186 and expanded in 2003 by State Atlantic Forest domain and its associated Decree No. 8649, and it now totals ecosystems are predominant and mostly 62,960.16 ha that cover the municipalities of consists of dense ombrophilous forest, Ilhéus, Itacaré, and Uruçuca (Brasil 2004). mangroves, herbaceous, shrublike and According to EcologicalEconomic arboreal sandbanks, depression areas Zoning, the territory of the APA is formed by (wetlands and lagoons) and an area of relict twelve management zones (Brasil 2004). vegetation locally known as campo cheiroso The present study was conducted in four (Bahia 1996; 1998; Brasil 2004). communities distributed in the following four The region also includes other important management zones: Camboinha, located in conservation units besides the APA Costa de the Agricultural and Agroforest Conservation ItacaréSerra Grande such as the Serra do Zones; Tesouras, located in the Conduru Conduru State Park (PESC), created in 1997 Special Protection Area, which corresponds with 9275 ha (Bahia 2005). Moreover, the to Serra do Conduru State Park; Nova Vida highest diversity of arboreal species per rural settlement, located in the Agroforest hectare in the world was identified in this Conservation Zone; and Serra Grande area and consists of 458 species in a single district, located in the Serra Grande hectare (Bahia 2005; Martini et al. 2007; Reference Plan of Development and Thomas et al. 1998).

Figure 1. Map of the study area showing the distribution of the studied communities: Camboinha, Tesouras, Nova Vida settlement, and Serra Grande (APA Costa de ItacaréSerra Grande and State Park Serra do Conduru, Bahia, Brazil).

3 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Southern Bahia has the most significant free listing technique (Borgatti 1998) that portion of the Atlantic Forest in the northeast consists of stating one issue of interest in a region of Brazil and a wide diversity of domain and asking the participants to list animal and plant species; it is also elements for this domain. We complemented considered one of the most important the technique with nonspecific prompting centers of endemism in this domain (Araujo and reading back (Weller and Romney et al. 1998; Moura, 2003). 1988). Cocoa (Theobroma cacao) is the main Before each interview, the objectives and crop in the region and it is cultivated inside methodological procedures were explained the agroforest system (SAF) known as to the participants and their formal written cocoacabruca (Cassano et al. 2009; consent was obtained. This research was Sambuichi 2002). This system is essential approved by the Ethics Committee of the for the conservation of forest remnants in the State University of Santa Cruz (Protocol Atlantic Forest in southern Bahia since it CAAE 61683516.2.0000.5526). also serves as an ecological corridor and In order to identify the mentioned species, habitat and provides resources for many we conducted a previous survey of fauna endemic species (Cassano et al. 2009; species recurrent in the study area and built Sambuichi 2002). a catalog with the pictures of these animals (Bahia 1996; Brasil 2005; Lobão and Data collection NogueiraFilho 2011; Ribeiro and Schiavetti 2009). During the interviews, the participants Fieldwork was conducted from December were shown the catalog to help them 2016 to May 2017. The participants were recognize the referred species. selected using the snowball technique (Bailey 1994) according to the following Qualitative analysis criteria: farmers, over the age of 18, with records of wild animal conflicts in their Interviews were qualitatively analyzed properties. using the model of union of all individual Data were collected using semistructured competencies (Marques 1991), in which all interviews (Albuquerque et al. 2010) that the information related to the research lasted 20 to 50 minutes. Statements were theme is considered. recorded with a recorder with the prior Species identification was based on consent of the participant and subsequently popular names and knowledge about the transcribed in full. The interviews were occurrence of the reported animals and conducted with only one resident of each supported by taxonomists who are familiar household to prevent overlap in a sampling with the species of this region, specialized unit. literature and previous zoological (Argôlo The field script was divided into three 2004; Brasil 1996; Brasil 2005) and parts: I) sociodemographic factors; II) ethnozoological research (Lobão and damage caused by wild animals to NogueiraFilho 2011; Ribeiro and Schiavetti agricultural crops and control measures 2009) conducted in the study area (Alves et used; and III) predation of domesticated al. 2012). animals and control measures used. Studies related to conflicts between During the interviews, we also used the humans and wildlife were classified

4 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

according to the adapted classification of contrast analysis for aggregation of non Peterson et al. (2010), who created nine significant levels (Crawley 2013). categories of conflict based on a review of To evaluate if there was a difference in other works on the subject. the composition of reported species in each The control measures used by the community, the permutational multivariate interviewees to minimize or avoid damage analysis of variance (PERMANOVA, caused by wild fauna were grouped Anderson 2001) was conducted, where the according to the classification of Mateus influence of communities on the composition (2013), as follows: 1) offensive methods, of species mentioned by the interviewees when the animal is slaughtered or harmed was tested using Jaccard distance and and 2) defensive methods when 1.000 permutations (Vegan Package; management strategies that do not kill or Oksanem et al. 2013). Data used in harm the animal are used. In addition, a third PERMANOVA analysis were represented by classification was created, called superstition nonmetric multidimensional scaling rituals, which refers to rituals performed to (NMDS). ward off bad luck and damage. Analysis of GLM and PERMANOVA were performed in Statistical R (R CORE TEAM, Quantitative analysis 2017) software version 3.1.0.

To determine whether the number of RESULTS interviews was sufficient for data collection, a curve of species accumulation was created Sociodemographic profile of with PAST (Palaeontological Statistics), participants software version 3.18, with reliability interval of 95%, using the Mao Tau method (Colwell Thirtyeight interviews were conducted et al. 2004). The curve was built considering with 31 men and 7 women aged from 24 to the number of wild species mentioned in all 78. Of these participants, 10 reside in the communities and the number of Camboinha, 6 in Tesouras, 17 in the rural interviewees. settlement Nova Vida and 5 in Serra With the generalized linear model (GLM; Grande. Crawley 2013), we evaluated the effect of Most of the residents had finished the sociodemographic variables, namely age, initial years (34.2%) and last years (31.6%) education, time living in the region of elementary school or had not attended (explanatory variables) for the number of school (29%). All of them are farmers, cited species. In order to obtain adequate except one merchant, who raised minimum models, nonsignificant domesticated animals. The majority of explanatory variables (p > 0.05) were participants (63%) had been living in the excluded. study area from 20 to 49 years. Additionally, an analysis of residue was Furthermore, most participants (78.9%) conducted to verify the adequacy of possible were subsistence farmers and also raised probability distribution and the error domesticated animals. The main crops they distribution of all models. When significant cultivated were cocoa (86.8%), followed by differences were observed among cassava (84.2%), corn (68.4%), banana communities, the data were submitted to (65.8%), pigeon pea (26.3%) and others with

5 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Table 1. List of the species cited by interviewees, classified in 5 categories of conflicts, with percentage included

6 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

7 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

8 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

a similar percentage to that of cocoa and to stabilize; however, an asymptote was not include fruits, vegetables, greenery and achieved, as shown in Figure 2, revealing tubercles (86.8%). In relation to animals, that more species not recorded in this work most farmers raised domesticated chickens can be in conflict with the participants. The for food and sale (63.2%) and dogs were the communities of Serra Grande and the Nova most commonly mentioned pet (60.5%). Vida rural settlement reported 31 species and the participants of Camboinha and HumanWild Animal conflicts Tesouras reported 29 and 22 species, respectively. Comparing the number of Fortyfive species of wild animals were species mentioned, a significant difference reported as being in conflict with the was observed among the communities participants. Of these animals, mammals (df=3, Deviance=12.8921, p=0.004), where were the most representative (51.1%), Tesouras showed a higher number of followed by birds (37.8%) and reptiles species mentioned per participant (df=1, (11.1%) (Table 2). Deviance=15.451, p=0.007) (Figure 3). The curve of accumulation (n=45) tended The following analyzed sociodemographic

9 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Figure 4. Diagram of the analysis of composition of the species mentioned in all communities Figure 2. Curve of species accumulation, (ANV= Nova Vida Settlement; CAM=Camboinha; correlating the number of species mentioned and SG=Serra Grande; TES=Tesouras; NMDS=Non interviewees. Blue lines represent confidence Metric Multidimensional Scaling). interval (95%). From the qualitative analysis, it was possible to identify five categories of conflict. These categories were adapted according to the classification of Peterson et al. (2010), as follows: animalcrop interaction, animal livestock interaction, animalfisheries interaction, animalhuman safety interaction, and animalproperty interaction.

AnimalCrop interaction

Figure 3. Analysis of contrast of the number of This category includes conflicts due to species mentioned in each community (ANV= invasion, consumption, or destruction of Nova Vida Settlement; CAM=Camboinha; crops by wild animals. It was identified in all SG=Serra Grande; TES=Tesouras). Change of communities and comprised the highest color in bars represents the significant difference. number of species mentioned (n=26/57.8%), represented by birds and mammals, with 13 variables did not affect the number of species each, affecting 18 agricultural species mentioned in each community: age varieties (Table 1). (df=1, Deviance=1.3765, p=0.24); education Collared peccary (Pecari tajacu) was the (df=4, Deviance=5.2939, p=0.26); and time most frequently reported species (73.7%), in the region (df=1, Deviance=0.1358, due to damage caused in the cassava crops p=0.71). Species composition among the (Table 1), followed by the yellow armadillo communities showed dissimilarity (df=3, (Euphractus sexcinctus) with 63.2%, which R2=0.2, p=0.0002, Figure 4) and only ten damaged the cassava and sweet potato species were reported in all communities, crops. The ratodocacau (Rhypidomys some of which received the majority of mastacalis) appears third (53.3%) and complaints (Table 1).

10 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

damaged the cocoa crops (Table 1). attacking chickens; however, only two were For birds, species of the Psittacidae identified at species level: roadside hawk family obtained the highest number of (Rupornis magnirostri) and southern crested complaints, mainly for affecting the corn caracara (Caracara plancus), with 13.2% crops. The goldencapped parakeet and 18.4%, respectively (Table 1). (Aratinga auricapillus) was mentioned by Among the reptiles, the boa (Boa 47.4% of the interviewees and the peach constrictor) received the second highest fronted parakeet (Eupsittula aurea) was percentage of mentions (39.5%). According mentioned by 44.7% (Table 1). Chopi black to the interviewees, despite being bird (Gnorimopsar chopi) also obtained a considered a pacific animal, it mainly attacks considerable number of mentions (39.5%) chickens and pet animals (Table 1). for damaging corn crops during cultivation and seed germination. AnimalFishery interaction According to the interviewees, the species did not invade the crops at any In this category, conflicts resulting from specific time of the year. These events occur wild animals attacking fish or freshwater when there is availability of crops, during shrimp (pitú) used in commerce, subsistence ripening and harvesting or when resources or recreation were included. It was reported such as fruits and other food are less by the interviewees of SerraGrande, available in the forest, thus leading animals Camboinha, and the Nova Vida settlement. to attack plantations in search of alternative Two animals were mentioned in this forms of food. category (4.4%): the socóbranco, which is a bird of the Ardeidae family, and the AnimalLivestock interaction Neotropical otter (Lontra longicaudis), which was the most important species mentioned This category is characterized by attacks in this type of conflict, with 7.9% of reports. of wild animals to domesticated animals, generating conflicts. It was reported in all AnimalHuman safety interaction communities and obtained the second highest number of species mentioned This category is characterized by conflicts (n=15/33.3%). Of these wild animals, eight in which wild animals represent a death are mammals, three are birds, and four are threat or risk for humans. This type of reptiles affecting eight groups of conflict was mentioned for Tesouras and domesticated animals (Table 1). Serra Grande. Only one serpent was For mammals, the order Carnivora was included (2.2%), jaracuçubocapodre involved in the highest number of conflicts, (Bothrops sp.), characterized as a especially the fox (Cerdocyon thous) dangerous species due to its poison. (47.4%) (Table 1). Moreover, this species was the only one included in two categories AnimalProperty interaction for causing damage to pineapple crops and for attacking domesticated animals. In Conflicts as a result of invasion or addition, it was reported as a risk of disease property occupation by wild animals were transmission to dogs. included in this category. It was reported in Three birds of prey were listed as Serra Grande and the Nova Vida settlement.

11 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Two animals were mentioned (4.4%): the bat collared peccary; preharvest production (2.3%) and house mouse (5.26%); however, prior to full ripening to prevent bird attacks; it was not possible to identify these animals and the installation of plant branches at species level. (‘cansanção’ and pepper) in the places bats usually perch. Control measures Superstition rituals are used against the collared peccary, blackbird, and the The majority of participants (n=29/76.3%) Neotropical otter by 13.8% of interviewees confirmed the use of one or a combination of who adopted control measures. measures to prevent or reduce damage Positive interactions were recurrent and caused by wild fauna. Offensive methods identified by 52.6% of interviewees, who are applied by 51.7% of the interviewees stated they did not use control measures for who stated they used control measures. certain species and conflict situations. These methods include direct slaughtering of In these cases, participants demonstrated the animal or use of poison, dogs, traps, empathy and respect for animals. The shotgun, or slingshot against 15 species. decision to not use control measure was The species that appeared as a target of based on their belief that some species, harmful attitudes were the collared peccary, such as the ratodocacau, need to find food. fox and yellow armadillo, which were Similarly, they also felt admiration associated considered as low concerning (LC) in the list with the desire for proximity, mainly for bird of the International Union for Conservation of species. Nature (IUCN) and did not appear in the Furthermore, control measures are not Official List of Fauna Species Threatened by used for some species when their ecological Extinction of the State of Bahia (Bahia 2017; role is recognized, as in the case of the IUC 2017.2). Additionally, the collared papapinto snake (Drymarchon corais). peccary, spotted paca, blackeared Although this species attacks chickens, it is opossum, tegu, yellow armadillo, and not usually killed by the interviewees parakeet are used as food after being because it is not poisonous and feeds on slaughtered other venomous species. Defensive methods are the most common measures and they were applied by 82.8% DISCUSSION of the interviewees for 20 species. These methods include use of scarecrows, brightly HumanWild animal conflicts colored fabrics and plastics, installation of cans on the plantations to make noise and Overall, conflicts in terrestrial fires (bombs) to scare the species of environments often occur involving parakeet, chopi blackbird and collared mammals, especially carnivores and large peccary; the construction of chicken houses herbivores; reptiles, commonly crocodilians with screens to prevent the fox, blackeared and serpents; and birds, especially opossum, tayra, birds of prey and boa from granivores and birds of prey (Torres et al. attacking chickens; cleaning and constantly 2018). attending to the field and spreading of cattle The curve of species accumulation urine as a natural repellent in the plantations tended to stabilize, demonstrating that the as a method of prevention against the sampling effort was sufficient. However, new

12 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

conflicts could be found, but the number of damage caused by primates in Africa indications during participant selection (Tweheyo et al. 2005). (snowball) ended. The collared peccary was mentioned as The higher number of species mentioned mainly responsible for damaging crops in the per participant in Tesouras can be related to studied communities. Moreover, it is environmental characteristics. All considered an agricultural plague in some communities are near forest fragments, locations (Alves et al. 2016; Santos et al. although Tesouras is located in a 2009). Conflicts with this species and the conservation unit called the Serra do yellow armadillo have been reported in Conduru State Park. The area is surrounded previous works, in which they damaged by vegetation that allows greater interaction cassava, banana, pupunha palm, bean and between the population and wild animals. corn crops (Lobão and NogueiraFilho 2011; According to Distefano (2005) conflicts in Ribeiro and Schiavetti 2009). these regions are usually due to a higher The third most frequently mentioned number of wild animals easily moving to species was the ratodocacau. Cocoa crops nearby inhabited areas. occupy a large part of the agricultural land in From our results, it was not possible to the region and significantly influence the identify influences of sociodemographic economic sector. For this reason, problems factors on the number of mentioned species. with damage caused by rodents in these In contrast, other works addressing the plantations are recurrent and identified in relationship between humans and fauna other works (Cruz 1983; Encarnação, 2001; point out that factors such as education, Lobão and NogueiraFilho 2011). As also gender, age, and country or urban reported by participants, Cruz (1983) environment affect the attitudes and reinforces that these vertebrates attack perceptions of people regarding animals cocoa fruits in several stages of (Pinheiro et al. 2016; Serpell 2004). development by perforating the husk to feed Thus, different types of agricultural and on the mucilage covering the almonds and cultivation practices, animal raising, and subsequently abandoning the seeds on the form of management, as well as ground. environmental characteristics defining In relation to birds, conflicts with species species richness could have influenced the of the Psittacidae family and the chopi black number and composition of reported species bird have been reported in different regions rather than the sociodemographic factors. of Brazil, where they damage crops of corn and other grains (Jacinto et al. 2007; Mateus AnimalCrop interaction 2013; SantosNeto and Gomes 2007). Many factors intensify this type of conflict, This form of interaction, which occurs such as loss and fragmentation of habitats widely around the world, is where mammal and changes in agricultural practices, thus species are chiefly responsible for damaging increasing competition for resources and crops. Examples include elephant invasions space between humans and fauna in plantations in Asia (Nath et al. 2015), crop (Distefano 2005; Marchini and Crawshaw damage caused by European boar (Sus 2015). However, according to the scrofa) in Brazil (Pedrosa et al. 2015) and interviewees and the observations of the United States (Poudyal et al. 2017) and Tweheyo et al. (2005), the availability and

13 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

abundance of food near foraging areas and anaconda species (Eunectes sp.) as scarcity of food in forest areas depending on predators of domesticated animals, such as the season may influence crop invasions dogs, cats, and birds, in South America. since the communities are near vegetation For birds of prey, conflicts with falcons areas. and hawks were documented in previous works conducted in northeastern Brazil, in AnimalLivestock interaction which they appear as a threat, mainly for cattle, goats, sheep, chickens, and ducks, Attacks of wild animals on domesticated leading to slaughtering as a control measure animals was the second most important type (Mendonça et al. 2011; FernandesFerreira of conflict reported by the participants, et al. 2012). especially fox attacks. Considered an The presence of livestock in areas near opportunistic species, the fox is reported as vegetation can influence the occurrence of a threat to livestock in many studies (Alves predation. In addition, poaching and habitat et al. 2016; Alves et al. 2012; Lobão and fragmentation may increase this type of NogueiraFilho 2011) and it is also known for conflict due to the reduction of the availability invading crops and as a possible transmitter of natural prey (Azevedo and Conforti 2002; of diseases such as rabies (Mendonça et al. Borges et al. 2017; Schulz et al. 2014). 2011). According to Marchini et al. (2011), illegal Livestock predation by carnivorous hunting of the natural prey of carnivorous animals is a recurrent and thoroughly animals contributes to the decline of food, investigated worldwide problem, especially which, together with the availability of in the case of big cats predating domesticated animals near habitat domesticated flock (GarciaAlaniz et al. remnants, leads to attacks of predators and 2010; Palmeiras and Barrella 2007; an increase in conflicts. Hunting still occurs Pettigrew et al. 2012; Schulz et al. 2014). In in this region for control, food and medicinal the study area, only gatodomato was purposes (Castilho et al. 2017; Ribeiro and reported, possibly related to the type of Schiavetti 2009; Teixeira 2018). domesticated animals found in the area Other anthropic factors that may reduce since this type of attack has been recorded natural prey are the inadequate use of fire, for cattle, goats, and sheep, which were not pesticides, parasitism, and predation by reported as livestock in the studied domestic dogs (Pitman et al. 2002). communities, and may be related to the lack Additionally, inappropriate management of of or low frequency of big cats in the region. livestock can facilitate carnivorous attacks Boa was the second most reported when these animals become more species in this category. Serpents are often vulnerable to predation (Pitman et al. 2002). considered harmful to people; however, three species were mentioned in the present AnimalFishery interaction study exclusively associated with domesticated animals. Similarly, boa was Competition between humans and wild also described by Alves et al. (2012) and animals for fishery resources and damages Mendonça et al. (2011) as representing a life caused to this activity have been registered threat to people and livestock. Moreover, in all regions of Brazil (Abade et al. 2007; Miranda and collaborators (2016) reported Barbieri et al. 2012; Pinheiro 2016). Species

14 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

such as the Neotropical otter (Lontra longicaudis) and giant otter (Pteronura Bats and mice were the only species brasiliensis) are often reported as a reason reported in this type of conflict in the study for this problem because they invade fish area. Braga et al. (2016) also registered that farming tanks, destroy fishing artifacts, and mice and elephants damage properties in a predate the fish (Abade et al. 2007; Marchini study about conflicts in Angola. Furthermore, et al. 2011; Pinheiro 2016). Arciniegas et al. (2015) reinforced problems In our study area, the otter was with bats in Armenia, QuindíoColombia. mentioned as the main species causing this Bats can use human structures as damage. However, as presented in our perches and they are known to adapt to results, this type of conflict was not widely urban landscapes with different reported for the region, which may be constructions and survive in areas occupied related to the low number of participants who by people when they lose their habitat (Rego captive breed fish and crustaceans since the et al. 2015). Despite this characteristic and target public of this work was not fishermen, bad reputation, conflicts with bats were but farmers. reported by only one participant. In general, invasion of properties by wild AnimalHuman safety interaction animals was rarely reported in this region, probably because bats, mice, and other wild Direct conflict between humans and wild animals do not frequently cause damage in animals is a major concern worldwide and the study area or are not considered a results in many human victims and source of conflicts. retaliations to fauna. Tigers, lions, elephants, hippocampuses, bears, crocodiles, and Control measures serpents are among the vertebrates commonly involved in terrestrial attacks Regarding offensive methods, (Babai et al. 2017; Dunham et al. 2010; slaughtering is the most common measure Goodrich 2010; Liu et al. 2011). directed to species that cause damage in Serpents are associated with risks to several regions of Brazil (Barbosa and human health, whether poisonous or not, Aguiar 2012; Lobão and NogueiraFilho due to a negative image attributed to this 2011; Mendonça et al. 2012; Palmeira and group (Babai et al. 2017). However, a small Barrelas 2007; RochaMendes et al. 2005; number of species was attributed to this Trinca and Ferrari 2006). The use of category in the study area, when compared domestic dogs to scare wild animals away, to other works (Alves et al. 2012; Mendonça classified in this study as offensive because et al. 2011). The majority of participants did it poses a risk of injury or death, is also not report animals, regardless of the group, widely registered in other studies. Moreover, as a direct threat to people. Even when the dogs are normally used to alert the presence interviewees did consider some species as of wild animals or even kill animals near being dangerous, they also accepted these residences (RochaMendes 2005; Palmeiras animals were not a potential risk when kept and Barrella 2007). at a safe distance. Lower tolerance associated with the negative reaction of humans regarding some AnimalProperty interaction species is probably linked to frequent and

15 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

intense effects on products of economic according to the informants, although some value or products considered fundamental species are still able to attacks the chickens for the subsistence of farmers (Hill 2004; depending on the physical structure of the NaughtonTreves 2001). As Dickman (2010) facilities. Confinement and use of fences are affirms, for people who depend on only one also widely used, mainly in the rearing of type of subsistence, the strategy of control cattle, goats, and sheep (Borges et al. 2017; tends to be antagonistic to dangerous Palmeira and Barrelas 2007; RochaMendes species. In this case, the destruction is 2005). intensified by the lack of alternative assets or For the collared peccary, some of the alternative income. scareaway methods proved to be effective. Additionally, some species can be used According to the interviewees, removing the for feeding after they are slaughtered. The weeds from inside and around the crops and collared peccary, for example, has been attending to the fields regularly to leave widely hunted for food and other uses, which traces of human scent, associated with the has contributed to the reduction and even use of scarecrows, seems to reduce the extinction of this population in several areas appearance of the collared peccary in the where it is originally distributed (Alves et al. plantations. 2016). Management strategies and preventive The animal species harmed by offensive measures have been pointed out in measures in the present study are not researches and specific works on the classified as threatened species. However, subject, especially changing the time of this damage, together with the hunting, still planting, anticipating harvest, diversifying occurring in the study area (Ribeiro and agriculture, confining domesticated animals Schiavetti 2009; Teixeira 2018), may affect at night, the use of electric fences and the permanence of these species in the screens, scarecrows and trained dogs as a region. form of alarm, monitoring fauna based on In the studied communities, defensive participatory planning and environmental methods are the most commonly used. education work (Jacinto et al. 2007; Marchini According to interviewees, scareaway et al. 2011; Palmeira and Barrelas 2007; strategies for parakeets and chopi black Pitiman 2002; Trinca and Ferrari 2006). birds are not considered very efficient, since However, it should be emphasized that the birds quickly get used to them and strategies success of control measures depends must be combined to avoid losing all heavily on the local context, thus, production. SantosNeto and Gomes (2007) understanding people's expectations before observed the same behavior in their work any intervention can enable the development about corn predation by the Lear’s macaw of mitigation strategies that satisfy all (Anodorhynchus leari) in the Bahia stakeholders (Hill, 2004). wilderness. Perceptions and attitudes towards fauna As observed in the study area, the use of are constituted beyond personal facts, aromatic plants to scare away bats was also experiences, and perceptions, and they are registered by Arciniegas et al. (2015). based on factors such as values, knowledge, The total or partial confinement of norms, expectations, beliefs, and broader domesticated animals as a measure to avoid social experiences (Dickman 2010; Drews predation by carnivores seems to work, 2002). For this reason, cultural aspects that

16 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

involve traditions, myths and superstitions of the diet of Drymarchon corais (Argôlo 2004) a society also influence the way people and the same justification was described by relate to animals. In the studied communities Mendonça et al. (2011) for the cobrapreta and according to the interviewees, the use of (Boiruna sertaneja Zaher, 1996). control methods based on rituals and Greater tolerance for conflict was also superstitions effectively minimizes or identified, especially when the damage prevents damage caused by wildlife. caused by the wild animal is not considered When the participants were asked who financially harmful, either because the had taught them to use these strategies and damage is very small or infrequent or when defensive methods, they reported that the the affected crop is only used for knowledge was acquired from family consumption. In addition, factors such as members or older people through species type and size, visibility, rarity and generations, from close friends and from the devastating events, danger level and self experiences of neighbors. Similarly, Toledo control in the situation influence the degree and BarreraBassols (2009) found that of risk perception in relation to animals that traditional or local knowledge is the result of may cause damage (Dickman 2010; Hill at least three strands: historically 2004; NaughtonTreves 2001). accumulated experience transmitted through generations, experience that is socially CONCLUSIONS shared by the members of the same generation and personal experience of the The ethnozoological approach adopted in producer and his or her family. this work allowed the diagnosis of conflicts As shown in our results, a species from the perspective of farmers, which are influences the attitudes and behavior of directly affected by this problem. As a result, people in conflicts. Many informants interact 45 species of mammals, birds, and reptiles positively with animals they consider involved in five categories of conflict charismatic, especially bird species. These interactions were identified. species are admired for their colors and Negative impacts caused by wild fauna song and they are among the most widely affect crops and animals that are essential to smuggled animals in the wild (Alves 2012). the subsistence of the interviewees and their According to Torres et al. (2018), many families. For example, damage to cassava, species involved in conflicts are charismatic cocoa, corn, and banana crops, as well as and attract the attention and admiration of the effect on chicken rearing increase the people, which is a factor that must be damage and can influence the tolerance of explored in the conservation of these the studied communities to the presence of animals. In addition, many participants some species in the region. recognize and emphasize the need for and The recognition of defensive measures of importance of protecting and conserving prevention and positive interaction between their environment and fauna, regardless of the participants and local fauna is an the group. important factor for mediating conflicts and The ecological role of some species was should be reinforced and encouraged in the also recognized, as in the case of the indigo communities. On the other hand, offensive snake (Drymarchon corais). According to the strategies were also reported, leading to the specialized literature, serpents are part of harming or killing of animals, which may

17 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5 reduce the species in the region and directly REFERENCES affect conservation efforts. The priority for biodiversity conservation Abade LAS, Moreno MEL, Ramos Jr VA, in an area with two important Conservation Andriolo A (2007) Avaliação da Ocorrência de Units APA Costa de ItacaréSerra Grande Ataques por Lontras Lontra longicaudis (Olfers, 1808) a Tanques de Piscicultura e a and Serra do Conduru State Park should Percepção dos Produtores. Anais do VIII be the creation and implementation of new Congresso de Ecologia do Brasil, Caxambu, strategies to solve or reduce conflict. These Minas Gerais. strategies are also important for social and Albuquerque UP, Lucena RFP, Alencar NL (2010) economic reasons and to guarantee the Métodos e Técnicas para coleta de dados efficient management and conservation of etnobiólogicos. In: Albuquerque UP, Lucena RFP, Cunha LVFC (eds) Métodos e Técnicas na local fauna, mainly for the species with the Pesquisa Etnobiológica e Etnoecologica. highest number of reports. Moreover, they Nupeea, Recife, Pernambuco, pp. 209222. must be created together with the local Alves RRN (2012) Relationships between population and environmental managers fauna and people and the role of based on all the environmental, ethnozoology in animal conservation. socioeconomic and cultural dimensions Ethnobiology and Conservation 1(2):169. involved in conflicts between humans and Alves RRN, Gonçalves MBR, Vieira WLS (2012) Caça, uso e conservação de vertebrados no wild animals. semiárido Brasileiro. Tropical Conservation Science 5396416. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Alves RRN, Souto WMS (2015) Ethnozoology: A Brief Introduction. Ethnobiology and We would like to thank the farmers of APA Conservation 4(1):113. Costa de ItacaréSerra Grande for their Alves RRN, Feijó A, Barboza RRD, Souto WMS, hospitality and shared knowledge. We also FernandesFerreira H, CordeiroEstrela P, thank the PRODEMA (Programa de Pós Langguth A (2016) Game mammals of the Caatinga biome. Ethnobiology and graduação em Desenvolvimento Regional e Conservation 5(5):151. Meio Ambiente); CAPES (Coordenação de Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non Aperfeiçoamento de Nível Superior) for the parametric multivariate analysis of variance. fellowships awarded to the first four authors; Austral Ecology, Hoboken 26(1):3246. and CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Araujo M, Alger K, Rocha R, Mesquita CAB Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico) (1998) A Mata Atlântica do Sul da Bahia: for the fellowship granted to the last author. situação atual, ações e perspectivas. Caderno 08. Conselho Nacional da Reserva da Biosfera We thank Felipe Pimenta for preparing the da Mata Atlântica, São Paulo. map. This study was partly financed by Arciniegas PAC, BoteroBotero A, MantillaMeluk Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Nível H (2015) Relación hombremurciélago en el Superior – Brasil (CAPES) – Finance Code norte de la ciudad de Armenia, Quindío, 001. Colombia. In: Monroy R, Flores AG, Moreno JMP, Costaneto EM (eds) Saberes Etnozoológicos Latinoamericanos. UEFS Editora, Feira de Santana, Bahia, pp.93108. Argôlo AJS (2004) As serpentes dos cacauais do sudeste da Bahia. Editus, Ilhéus, Bahia.

18 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Azevedo FCC, Conforti VA (2002) Fatores Borgatti S (1998) Elicitation techniques for predisponentes à predação. In: Pitman MRPL, cultural domain analysis. In: LeCompte MD, Oliveira TG, Paula RC, Indrusiak C (eds) Manual Schensul JJ (eds.). Designing and conducting de identificação, prevenção e controle de ethnographic research (Ethnographer's Toolkit, predação por carnívoros. Edições Ibama, 2ed), Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp.1 Brasília. 26. Babai D, Viktor U, Ákos A (2017) Conflicts of Borges LS, CostaNeto EM, SantosFita D, Economic and Cultural Origin Between Alvarez MRV, Loss ATG (2017) Quando o Farmers and Wild Animal Species in the predador se torna presa: conflito entre Carpathian Basin – an Ethnozoological fazendeiros e a onçaparda (Puma concolor, Approach. Acta Ethnographica Hungarica 62(1): LINNAEUS,1771) no Nordeste do Brasil. 187–206. Ethnoscientia 2:120. Bahia (Estado), Secretaria de Cultura e Turismo Braga F, Franzini LD, Alves RRN (2016) SCT, Coordenação de desenvolvimento do Percepção de Moradores Locais Acerca de TurismoCODETUR (I996) Plano de manejo Conflitos entre Populações Humanas e Área de Proteção Ambiental Litoral de Itacaré Animais Silvestres no Parque Nacional da Serra GrandeZoneamento e Plano de Gestão, Quiçama (Angola). In: Anais XI do Simpósio v. II. SCTCODETUR, Salvador, Bahia, Brasil. Brasileiro de Etnobiologia e Etnoecologia, I Bahia (Estado), Secretaria de Cultura e Turismo Festival de Sementes Crioulas da Bahia. Z Arte SCT, Coordenação de desenvolvimento do Editora, Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brasil. TurismoCODETUR, Empresa de Turismo da Brasil, Ministério do Meio AmbienteMMA, Bahia S.ABAHIATURSA, Prefeituras Municipais Programa Piloto para a Proteção das Florestas de Itacaré e Uruçuca (1998) Área de Proteção TropicaisPPG7Projeto Corredores Ecológicos, Ambiental Itacaré/Serra Grande, Plano de Bahia (Estado), Secretaria de Meio Ambiente e Manejo Zoneamento Ecológicoeconômico e Recursos AmbientaisSEMARH, Centro de Plano de GestãoSíntese. SCT, Salvador, Recursos AmbientaisCRA, Superintendência de Bahia, Brasil. Desenvolvimento Florestal e Unidades de Bahia (Estado), Secretaria de Meio Ambiente e ConservaçãoSFC (2004) Revisão do Recursos Hídricos SEMARH, Superintendência Zoneamento EcológicoEconômico: APA de Desenvolvimento Florestal e Unidade de Costa de ItacaréSerra Grande. Instituto de Conservação–SFC (2005) Plano de Manejo do Estudos Socioambientais do Sul da BahiaIESB, Parque Estadual da Serra do ConduruBA. Conservação Internacional do BrasilCI, Ilhéus, SEMARH, Salvador, Bahia, Brasil. Bahia, Brasil. Bahia (Estado): Portaria nº 37 de 15 de agosto Cassano CR, Schroth G, Faria D, Delabie JHC, de 2017. Torna pública a lista oficial das Bede L (2009) Landscape and farm scale espécies da fauna ameaçadas de extinção do management to enhance biodiversity estado da Bahia. Diário Oficial da Bahia. conservation in the cocoa producing region of southern Bahia, Brazil. Biodiversity and Bailey K (1994) Methods of social research. Conservation 18:577–603. Free Press, New York, 1994. Castilho L, Vleeschouwer KM, MilnerGulland EJ, Barbieri F, Machado R, Zappes CA, Oliveira LR Schiavetti A (2017) Hunting of mammal (2012) Interactions between the Neotropical species in protected areas of the southern otter (Lontra longicaudis) and gillnet fishery Bahian Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Oryx 111. in the southern Brazilian Coast. Ocean & Coastal Management 63:1623. Crawley MJ (2013) The R book. 2ed. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, United Kingdom. Barbosa JAA, Aguiar JO (2012) Conflitos decorrentes da caça no semiárido Colwell RK, Mao CX, Chang J (2004) nordestino: um estudo de caso no município Interpolating, extrapolating, and comparing de FagundesPB. Âmbito Jurídico 15(106). incidencebased species accumulation http://www.ambitojuridico.com.br/site/index.php/ curves. Ecology 85:27172727 Ricardo%20Antonio? Cruz PFN (1983) Ocorrência e avaliação de n_link=revista_artigos_leitura&artigo_id=12478. danos causados por roedores pragas do Acessado em 14 de março de 2017. cacaueiro na Bahia, Brasil. Revista Theobroma 13(1):5960.

19 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Dickman AJ (2010) Complexities of conflict: Jacinto JC, Toti TP, Guaritá RL, Melo C (2007) the importance of considering social factors Dano em Um Cultivo de Sorgo (Sorghum for effectively resolving human–wildlife bicolor) Causado por Aves. Anais do VIII conflict. Animal Conservation 13:458–466. Congresso de Ecologia do Brasil, Caxambu, Distefano E (2005) Human–wildlife conflict Minas Gerais. worldwide: a collection of case studies, Kaltenborn BP, Bjerke T, Nyahongo J (2006) analysis of management strategies and good Living with Problem Animals—SelfReported practices. Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Fear of Potentially Dangerous Species in the Development (SARD), Food and Agricultural Serengeti Region, Tanzania. Human Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Dimensions of Wildlife 11(6):397409, 2006. Italy. Liu F, McShea WJ, Garshelis DL, Zhu X, Wang Drews C (2002) Attitudes, knowledge and wild D, Shao L (2011) Humanwildlife conflicts animals as pets in Costa Rica. Anthrozoös: A influence attitudes but not necessarily multidisciplinary journal of the interactions of behaviors: factors driving the poaching of people and animals 15(2):119138. bears in China. Biological Conservation Dunham KM, Ghiurghi A, Cumbi R, Urbano F 144:538547. (2010) Human–wildlife conflict in Lobão ESP, NogueiraFilho SLG (2011) Human Mozambique: a national perspective, with wildlife Conflicts in the Brazilian Atlantic emphasis on wildlife attacks on humans. Oryx Forest. Suiform Soundings 10(2):1422. 44(2):185–193. Madden FM (2004) Creating Coexistence Encarnação AMV (2001) Ocupação temporal e between Humans and Wildlife: Global espacial e aspectos da predação de frutos do Perspectives on Local Efforts to Address cacaueiro (Theobroma cacao L.) por Human–Wildlife Conflict. Human Dimensions pequenos mamíferos (Mammalia) em of Wildlife 9247–257. cacauais e mata atlântica no sudeste da Madden FM (2008) The growing conflict Bahia. Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade between humans and wildlife: law and policy Estadual de Santa Cruz, Ilhéus, Bahia, Brasil. as contributing and mitigating factors. Journal FernandesFerreira H, Mendonça SV Albano C, of International Wildlife Law & Policy 11:189206. Ferreira FS, Alves RRN (2012) Hunting, use Marques JGW (1991) Aspectos ecológicos na and conservation of birds in Northeast Brazil. Etnoictiologia dos pescadores do complexo Biodiversity and Conservation 21:221–244. EstuarinoLagunar MundaúManguabá GarciaAlaniz N, Naranjo EJ, Mallory FF (2010) Alagoas. Tese de doutorado, Universidade HumanFelid Interactions in Three Mestizo Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Communities of the Selva Lacandona, Brasil. Chiapas, Mexico: Benefits, Conflicts and Marques JGW (1995) Pescando pescadores: Traditional Uses of Species. Human Ecology Etnoecologia Abrangente no Baixo São 38:451–457. Francisco. NUPAUBUSP, São Paulo, Brasil. Goodrich JM (2010) Human–tiger conflict: A Marchini S, Cavalcanti SMC, Paula RC (2011) review and call for comprehensive plans. Predadores Silvestres e Animais Domésticos: Integrative Zoology 5:300312. guia prático de convivência. ICMBIO, Brasília. Hill C (2004) Farmers’ perspectives of conflict Marchini S, Crawshaw Jr PG (2015) Human– at the wildlifeagriculture boundary: some Wildlife Conflicts in Brazil: A FastGrowing lessons learned from African subsistence Issue. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 20(4):323– farmers. Human Dimension Wildlife 9:279 286. 328. Hunn ES (2011) Ethnozoology. In: Anderson Marshall K, Rehema W, Fischer A (2007) EN, Pearsall DM, Hunn ES, Turner NJ (eds). Conflicts between humans over wildlife Ethnobiology. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, management: on the diversity of stakeholder United States of America, p. 83–96. attitudes and implications for conflict IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2017.2). management. Biodiversity and Conservation http://www. iucnredlist.org. Acessado em 05 de 16:3129–3146. outubro de 2017.

20 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Martini AMZ, Fiaschi P, Amorim AM, Paixão JP Pedrosa F, Salerno R, Padilhac FVB, Galetti M (2007) A hotpoint within a hotspot: a high (2015) Current distribution of invasive feral diversity site in Brazil's Atlantic Forest. pigs in Brazil: economic impacts and Biodiversity and Conservation 16:31113128. ecological uncertainty. Natureza & Mateus MB (2013) Relação entre fauna Conservação 13(1):84–87. silvestre e produtores rurais: estudos de Peterson MN, Birckhead JL, Leong K, Peterson casos em milho (Zea mays L.) e goiaba MJ, Peterson TR (2010) Rearticulating the (Psidium guajava L.) na Zona da Mata de myth of human–wildlife conflict. Conservation Minas Gerais. Dissertação de mestrado, Letters 3:7482. Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Pettigrew M, Xie Y, Kang A, Rao M, Goodrich J, Brasil. Liu T, Berger J (2012) Human–carnivore conflict Mendonça LET, Souto CM, Andrelino LL, Souto in China: a review of current approaches with WMSS, Vieira WLS, Alves RRN (2011) Conflitos recommendations for improved management. entre pessoas e animais silvestres no Integrative Zoology 7:210–226. semiárido paraibano e suas implicações para Pinheiro P (2016) A Lontra Neotropical, Lontra conservação. Sitientibus 11:185199. longicaudis (Olfers, 1808), e seus Conflitos Miranda EBP, RibeiroJr RP, Strüssmann C com Pescadores em uma Área de Proteção (2016) The ecology of humananaconda Ambiental no Nordeste do Brasil. Dissertação conflict: a study using internet vídeos. de Mestrado, Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Tropical Conservation Science 9(1):4377. Maceió, Alagoas, Brasil. Moura RT (2003) Distribuição e ocorrência de Pinheiro LT, Rodrigues JFM, BorgesNojosa DM mamíferos na Mata Atlântica do sul da Bahia. (2016) Formal education, previous interaction In: Prado PI, Landau EC, Moura RT, Pinto LPS, and perception influence the attitudes of Fonseca GAB, Alger KN (eds.) Corredor de people toward the conservation of snakes in Biodiversidade na Mata Atlântica do Sul da a large urban center of northeastern Brazil. Bahia. IESB, CI, CABS, UFMG, UNICAMP, Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine Ilhéus, Bahia, Brasil. 12(25):17. NaughtonTreves L (2001) Farmers, Wildlife Pitman MRPL, Oliveira TG, Paula RC, Indrusiak and the Forest Fringe. In: NaughtonTreves L C (2002) Manual de identificação, prevenção (ed.). African Rain Forest Ecology and e controle de predação por canívoros. IBAMA, Conservation, Yale University Press Yale, pp. Brasília. 369384. Poudyal NC, Caplenor C, Joshi O, Maldonado C, Nath NK, Dutta SK, Das JP, Lahkar BP (2015) A Muller LI, Yoest C (2017) Characterizing the quantification of damage and assessment of economic value and impacts of wild pig economic loss due to crop raiding by Asian damage on a rural economy. Human Elephant Elephas maximus (Mammalia: Dimensions of Wildlife 22:538549. Proboscidea: Elephantidae): a case study of Rego KMC, Zeppelini CG, Lopez LCS, Alves Manas National Park, Assam, India. Journal of RRN (2015) Assessing humanbat Threatened Taxa 7(2):6853–6863. interactions around a protected area in Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, Kindt R, northeastern Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology Legendre P, McGlinn D, Minchin PR, O'Hara RB, and Ethnomedicine 11(80):18. Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Szoecs Ribeiro GC, Schiavetti A (2009) Conocimiento, E, Wagner H. (2013) Vegan: community Creencias y Utilización de la mastofauna por ecology package. R package, version 2.40. los pobladores del parque estatal de la sierra https://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/vegan/ de conduru, Bahia, Brasil. In: CostaNeto EM, index.html. Acessado em: 30 de jan. de 2018. SantosFita D, Clavijo MV (eds). Manual de Palmeira FB, Barrella. W (2007) Conflitos Etnozoología: Una guia teóricopráctica para causados pela predação de rebanhos investigar la interconexión del ser humano son domésticos por felinos em comunidades los animales. Tundra Ediciones, Valencia, quilombolas na Mata Atlântica. Biota España. Neotropica 7(1):119128, 2007.

21 Santos et al. 2020. Conflicts between humans and wild animals in and surrounding protected area (Bahia, Brazil): an ethnozoological approach. Ethnobio Conserv 9:5

Roca ER, Corona E (2017) La importancia de Serpell JA (2004) Factors influencing human diversas, complementarias y comparativas attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal miradas en la investigación sobre las Welfare 13:145151. interacciones entre los humanos y la fauna Teixeira JVS (2018) Caça e usos dos animais en América Latina. Antípoda. Revista de silvestres na região do Parque Estadual Serra Antropología y Arqueología, 28:1329. do Conduru–PESC, Bahia, Brasil. Dissertação RochaMendes L, Mikich SB, Bianconi GV, de Mestrado, Universidade Estadual de Santa Pedro WA (2005) Mamíferos no Município de Cruz, Ilhéus, Bahia, Brasil. Fenix, Paraná, Brasil: Etnozoologia e Thomas WW, Carvalho AMV, Amorim AMA, Conservação. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia Garrison J, Arbeláez AL (1998) Plant endemism 22(4):9911002. in two forests in southern Bahia, Brazil. Sambuichi RHR (2002) Fitossociologia e Biodiversity and Conservation 7:311–322. diversidade de espécies arbóreas em Toledo VM, BarreraBassols NA (2009) cabrucas (Mata Atlântica raleada sobre Etnoecologia: uma ciência pósnormal que plantação de cacau) na região sul da Bahia, estuda as sabedorias tradicionais. Brasil. Acta Botânica Brasilica 16:89101. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente UFPR 20:31 Santos DO, Dimas O, Mendes A, Nogueira SSC, 45. NogueiraFilho SLG (2009). Criação comercial Torres DF, Oliveira ES, Alves RRN (2018) de caititus (Pecar tajacu): uma alternativa Understanding HumanWildlife Conflicts and para o agronegócio. Revista Brasileira de Their Implications. In: Alves RRN, Albuquerque Saúde e Produção Animal 10(1):110. UP (ed.). Ethnozoology Animals In Our Lives. SantosNeto JR, Gomes DM (2007) Predação Academic Press, United States. de milho por araraazuldeLear, Trinca CT, Ferrari SF (2006) Caça em Anodorhynchus leari (Bonaparte, 1856) assentamento rural na Amazônia mato (Aves: Psittacidae) em sua área de ocorrência grossense. http://www.anppas.org.br/ no Sertão da Bahia. Ornithologia 2(1):4146, encontro_anual/encontro2/GT/GT02/ 2007. GTCristiano.pdf. Acessado em 05 de abr. de Schulz F, Printes RC, Oliveira LR (2014) 2016. Depredation of domestic herds by pumas Tweheyo M, Hill CM, Obua J (2005) Patterns of based on farmer’s information in Southern crop raiding by primates around the Budongo Brazil. Journal of Ethnobiology and Forest reserve, Uganda. Wildlife Biology 11(3): Ethnomedicine 10(73):111. 237–247. Senthilkumar K, Mathialagan P, Manivannan C, Weller SC, Romney A K (1988) Systematic data Jayathangaraj MG, Gomathinayagam S (2016) A collection. Sage, Newbury Park, Califórnia, study on the tolerance level of farmers United States. toward humanwildlife conflict in the forest buffer zones of Tamil Nadu. Veterinary World 9(7):747752.

Received: 07 January 2019 Accepted: 04 February 2020 Published: 27 February 2020