Effect of Wildlife Species on the Activities of Agroforest Farmers in Ekiti State

Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences 1(1); January 2013 pp. 24-35 Olujobi, Sale & Akande Effect of Wildlife Species on the Activities of Agroforest Farmers in Ekiti State Olujobi O. J. Department of Forestry Wildlife and Fisheries Management Ekiti State University P.M.B. 5363, Ado – Ekiti, Nigeria. Sale F .A. Department of Forestry and Wildlife Kogi State University P.M.B 1008, Anyigba, Nigeria. Akande O. M. Department of Forestry Wildlife and Fisheries Management Ekiti State University P.M.B. 5363, Ado – Ekiti, Nigeria. Abstract Continued reduction and fragmentation of trampling, defoliation, browsing of young shoot natural habitat and feeding site for wildlife and leaves and plucking of fruits.Finally the species through man’s developmental activities, result shows that control measure such asthe has led to the encroachment of wildlife use of dog, chemical, trapping, scared off by population into the adjacent farm land to search guards, hunting, poison,use of charm and use of for food, thereby leading to destruction of human statue, were employed to checkmate the agroforestrytrees and crops.This study activities of these animals on farmers examined the effect of wildlife species on farmlands. activities of agroforest farmers in Ekiti State forest reserves. The study area was stratified on Key words: Wildlife, agroforestry, farmers, Ekiti-State, forest reserves the basis of vegetation into two zones (rain forest and derived savannah zones). Eighty pre- 1.0 Introduction testedquestionnaireswererandomly administered In the past, over 14 percent of Nigeria total land to farmers for collection of data. Information mass was made up of forest (FAO, 2004). The obtained revealed that majority of the forest land cover in the country offers a good respondents are married (93%), middle age habitat for wildlife population and at the same (50%) men (60 %). Mammals and aves time provide food for them. However, man contitutes the highest group of animals activities over the years have altered the rich present.The respondents opined that wildlife nature of these forest vegetations. species impact both negatively and positively on their trees and crops. Some of the damages done by wildlife to trees and crops includes; cutting, uprooting, © American Research Institute for Policy Development 26 www.aripd.org/jaes Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences 1(1); January 2013 pp. 24-35 Olujobi, Sale & Akande Estimate by NEST (1991) shows that over 50% Others argue that existing protected areas are of these forests and natural vegetation have been already too small to maintain viable populations cleared for other human developmental project of many large animals and only by extending such as road construction, agriculture and urban the habitat beyond park boundaries can viable development (Sayer, 2001).The implication of wildlife population be maintained over a long this trend is continued reduction and period of time (Dinersteinet. al., 1999; fragmentation of natural forest which is the Seidenstickeret. al., 1999). Historically, the habitat and feeding site for wildlife species. This problem of human–wildlife conﬂict has fallen situation has led to the encroachment by wildlife under the aegis of wildlife conservation population into the adjacent farm land to search authorities. However, their jurisdiction often for food, thereby leading to destruction of trees ends at the park’s boundary. Solutions are and crops in agroforestry area (Ayodele and difficult to develop because there is no other Adegeye, 1993). professional discipline which embraces the subject (Sayer, 2001). Ultimately, both people The effect of wildlife on agroforest farmers’ and wildlife suffer the consequences where activities can be extensive. Although damage is conﬂict is unresolved. most often considered in terms of reduced productivity or delayed harvest cycles, attempts As an important land use, the value of to replace trees after a harvest or a fire out break agroforestry systems for integrating biological can also be a complete failure because of conservation (plant and animal) and economic foraging wildlife. The full impact of wildlife on development goals is high. Agroforestry plays agroforest farmers’ activities is frequently an increasingly important role in the protection difficult to assess because of the complexity of and conservation of wildlife population and the the resources interaction. This complexity is overall maintenance of stable ecosystem. It is inherent because of the spatial and temporal believed that these values can be increased still scales of forests. Assessing the effect of wildlife further if the agroforest farmers in the rural on agroforest farmers’ activities is further community decide to assume a leadership role complicated by the diversity of wildlife species in addressing the issue of human-wildlife that forage on forest flora, and the varied conflict, which is fast becoming a central threat management approaches employed by to the effectiveness of the system and survival landowners. Moreover, wildlife species are of many large endangered species. considered to be integral and desirable Farmers, foresters and wildlife conservators can components of forest ecosystems, thus benefit enormously if appropriate methods are eradicating problem species is not an acceptable developed to vigorously define the distribution option. and frequency of conflict between the wildlife Landscapes outside strict protected areas are population and agroforest farmers in the forest gaining increasing attention from wildlife reserves and other protected areas. Therefore, researchers for their conservation value.Karanth the aim of this study is to assess the effect of and Stith (1999) argue that identifying, wildlife population on the activities of protecting, maintaining, and monitoring prey- agroforest farmers in Ekiti-State forest reserves rich habitat patches, with multiple uses, should and suggest were neccessary ways of more be central to wildlife conservation and recovery collaboration among the stakeholders. efforts. © American Research Institute for Policy Development 27 www.aripd.org/jaes Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences 1(1); January 2013 pp. 24-35 Olujobi, Sale & Akande 2.0 Methodology Two distinct types of vegetation are predominant in the study area namely; the 2.1 Study area derived savannah vegetation to the northern The study was carried out in Ekiti-State,Nigeria. peripheries and the rain forest belt covering Ekiti-State is located between Longitude 40 51 larger percentage of the total land area to the and 50 4.51 East of the Greenwich meridian and south. Latitudes 70 151 and 8051 North of the Equatorin 2.2Sampling procedure Southwestern Nigeria. The climate of the study area is of the West Africa monsoonal type with The study area was stratified into two zones on dry and wet season; the dry season normaly start the basis of vegetation (derived savannah and fom November through March and is rainforest). One forest reserve was purposively characterized by dry cold wind of harmatta. The selected from each of the vegetation zones rainy season normaly start from late March based on the preliminary study which shows the through October with occasional strong wind preponderance of agroforestry activities in those and thunder storm, usually at the onset and the forest reserves. Four villages surrounding each end of the season. of the forest reserve were selected.Ten randomly selected agroforest farmers in each The annual rainfall ranged from 750 mm in the villagewere interviewed using personal contact northern zone to 1200 mm in the southern zone. 0 0 method guided by a pre-tested interview Temperature ranges between 21 C to 34 C with schedule,since few of the respondents cannot little variation throughout the year. Annual read or write.The interview schedule which average relative humidity is about 90 % at contains both structured and unstructured 7.00am and 65 % at 4.00pm.The topography is questionswas designed to obtain information on hilly with large numbers of hills of various sizes the respondents’ socio-economic surrounding most of the towns and 2 characteristics,wild animal species present, villages.Ekiti-State covers an area of 6,353km . damage caused to agroforest famers’ trees and crops and control measure put in place to checkmate the wildlife species.Data collected from the studywas analyzed using descriptive statistical in form of frequency and percentages. Table 1: Distribution of Respondents in the Study Area Vegetation belts Forest reserves Village No of respondents Rainforest Ise Kojola-Ise 10 Orun-Ekiti 10 Ilupeju-Ijan 10 Obada-Ise 10 Derived Savannah Eda Eda-Ile Ekiti 10 Omuo-Ekiti 10 Ilasha-Ekiti 10 Ayebode-Ekiti 10 Total 2 8 80 © American Research Institute for Policy Development 28 www.aripd.org/jaes Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences 1(1); January 2013 pp. 24-35 Olujobi, Sale & Akande 3.0 Results and Discussion 3.1 Socio-economic characteristics of respondents in the study area Results on Table 2shows that majority of the This is an indication that the respondents had respondents arefairly old (>30 years) married enough handsto assist them on their farm, as (93%), men (77.5%), which revealed that most of the operations (clearing, weeding and farming activities in the study area was tending) in agroforestry are labour practically in the hand of aged men. This intensive.Result on educational finding agreed with earlier report backgroundshows that only 18.75%, of the byOlujobi,(2012)

Load more