African Primates 7 (1): 27-34 (2010)

Farmers’ Perceptions of the Impact of Wildlife on Small-Scale Cacao Cultivation at the Northern Periphery of Dja Faunal Reserve,

Małgorzata E. Arlet & Freerk Molleman

Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

Abstract: Cacao is mainly grown by small-scale farmers in the understory of tropical forests. Given nutritious food which is easily accessible at low levels of the forest, offtake by wildlife is expected to be high, potentially leading to high levels of perceived human-wildlife conflict. This potential set of consequences, however, has rarely been investigated, and never in Africa. Between July and October 2004, we interviewed 28 cacao growers and visited their plantations near three villages at the northern periphery of the Dja Faunal Reserve in Cameroon. The focus of the research was to assess cacao crop-raiding by small and large mammals, and the methods used by growers to prevent crop damage. Most cacao plantations were located inside the forest; all were outside the reserve. Data from interviews suggested that the cacao was damaged by 12 types of mammal, with squirrels and three primate species (chimpanzee, agile mangabey, moustached guenon) being perceived as causing the most severe damage. Primates were perceived to be responsible for 43% of crop damage. Perceived crop loss from wildlife was not correlated with distance to the village, and was negatively correlated to active guarding of fields, including making noise. Observations in plantations with ripening pods indicated that squirrels and antelopes were mainly responsible for crop damage at this time, although we also recorded rotting pods and high levels of dieback (dead branches and trees) due to disease.

Key words: Theobroma cacao, cacao farming, crop-raiding, protected species, small-scale farming, human-wildlife conflict

Résumé: Le cacao est principalement cultivé par les agriculteurs à petite échelle sous la voûte de feuillage des forêts tropicales. Les plantations, donnant donc un accès facile à des aliments nutritifs, les prélèvements par la faune devraient être élevés, ce qui pourrait aboutir à des niveaux élevés de conflits entre les populations humaines et la faune sauvage. Cependant, cela est rarement étudié et jamais jusqu’à présent en Afrique. Nous avons interrogé 28 producteurs de cacao et visité leurs plantations en se concentrant sur les attaques de cultures par les petits et grands mammifères, ainsi que les méthodes utilisées par les producteurs afin d’empêcher les dommages aux cultures dans trois villages à la périphérie nord de la réserve de faune du Dja entre Juillet et Octobre 2004. La plupart des plantations de cacao étaient situés à l’intérieur de la forêt, en dehors de la réserve. La distance des plantations aux villages n’était pas en corrélation avec les dommages perçus. Les entrevues ont montré que le cacao a été endommagé par 12 types de mammifères. Les écureuils, et trois espèces de primates (chimpanzés, cercocèbes agile, moustacs), étaient perçus comme a l’origine des dommages les plus graves. Les primates ont été perçus comme responsables de quarante-trois pour cent des dommages aux cultures. La perception des pertes de récolte due à la faune sauvage était négativement corrélée avec les plantations qui étaient gardé, et avec les producteurs qui faisaient du bruit face a la faune sauvage. Des observations dans les plantations avec des gousses en maturation, ou nous avons également enregistré des niveaux élevés de pourriture des gousses et de dépérissement (branches et arbres morts), ont montré que les écureuils et les antilopes sitatunga étaient les principales responsables de dégâts aux cultures.

Introduction turned such agriculture into a major environmental The combination of slash-and-burn agriculture with concern (FAO, 1999). A United Nations conference on bushmeat hunting, as practised by indigenous people in a the environment and development identified tropical non-market economy, often does not result in large-scale deforestation in general, and slash-and-burn agriculturein environmental damage. In contrast, market-based slash- particular, as global concerns (UNCED, 1992). The and-burn agriculture in conjunction with transportation resulting ‘alternatives to slash-and-burn programme’ (ASB- networks, market forces, and population growth have Partnership to the Tropical Forest Margins) identified the ______Correspondence to: Małgorzata E. Arlet, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Vanemuise 46, EE-51014 Tartu, Estonia. Email: [email protected]. 28 / Arlet & Molleman

humid forests of southern Cameroon as one of the initial Nyhus et al., 2000; Morf et al., 2008; Priston & Underdown, benchmark areas in the Guinean forests of West Africa 2009; McKinney & Zamora, 2008; Warren et al., 2007; and the . As a result of this program, cacao Kagoro-Rugunda, 2004; Madhusudan, 2003; Tweheyo agroforests subsequently were found to be potentially et al., 2005; Hockings et al., 2009; Hockings & Humle, useful for reducing global emissions of carbon dioxide. 2009). Because crop-raiding can affect the profitability of This was based on observations that agroforestry alleviates cacao cultivation and also causes resentment of wildlife the cutting of tropical forests, which is a major factor and lack of compliance with conservation activities, this

contributing to accumulating atmospheric CO2 (ASB study examined farmers’ perception of crop-raiding on 2007), and can promote biodiversity conservation (Rice & cacao plantations by mammals, and looked at the methods Greenberg, 2000; Bos et al., 2007; Delabie et al., 2007; Faria used to prevent damage to crops, in areas in the northern & Baumgarten, 2007; Faria et al., 2007; Harvey & Villalobos, periphery of Dja Faunal Reserve, Cameroon. 2007; Salgado-Mora et al., 2007; Schroth & Harvey, 2007). People living and working in forests are partly Methods responsible for deforestation and bushmeat hunting, and are the same people that could adopt more environment- Study site friendly alternatives. These alternatives would include Dja Faunal Reserve (DFR) covers an area of 5000 km2 those which are aimed at poverty alleviation, carbon and is located on the Dja River in the central-southern sequestration, and enhanced biodiversity conservation and eastern provinces of Cameroon. Our field site was (Steffan-Dewenteret al., 2007). In Cameroon, cacao grown located at the northern periphery of the Reserve (2˚ 49`- as an understory shrub in forests has, in the past, served as 3˚ 23`N, 12˚ 25`-13˚ 35`E), where logging and hunting an economically attractive land use. This changed during degrade the still vast forests harboring a high biodiversity the period of 1993-1996 when many farmers rejected cacao (Dupain et al., 2004, Molleman et al., 2005, Mertens and growing because of low and unpredictable prices and a Lambin, 2000). changing institutional context of support (Purdy et al., 1998). Until the early 1990s, the Cameroon government Data Collection provided farmers with free fungicides. With currency We investigated cacao damage in three village devaluation and the end of guaranteed prices for cacao, communities (Mimpala, 12 km from DFR; Doumo-Pierre, however, the government discontinued this assistance, 18 km from DFR; and Malen V, 24 km from DFR) through insecticides became less available, and many farmers the use of questionnaires and visits to plantations between abandoned their cacao plantations. With recent increases August - October 2004. These villages work with Projet in cacao prices, more farmers are again considering cacao Grands Singes (PGS) to carry out research on gorillas and growing as a profitable activity (Duguma et al., 2001). chimpanzees at a nearby site, to protect these apes, and Cacao is grown mainly (>80%) by small-scale farmers and to develop alternative sources of income. The plantations it is considered their most important cash crop (Assoumou, were inside unprotected, continuous forest (with scattered 1977; ASB, 2007; Duguma et al., 2001). clearings around villages) and had a canopy of large In the human forest zone in Cameroon (Mertens & indigenous trees. All of the owners of the 39 plantations Lambin, 2000), cash crops such as groundnuts, maize and in this area, 26 men and two women, were interviewed: melon are grown in a transition between slash-and-burn 16 in Malen V, 7 in Doumo, and 5 in Mimpala. The size cultivation and sedentary farming (Arlet & Molleman of the plantations was variable and not measured, but 2007), and cacao (Theobroma cacao) is grown as an was estimated to range from 100 to 2000 trees. The two understory shrub in forests. At the northern periphery of women in our sample had lost their husbands and had the Dja Faunal Reserve in Cameroon, farming of crops younger male relatives working their cacao plantations; for personal consumption (as well as peanuts, maize and these workers also were present during the interviews. melon for local markets) is mainly delegated to women Most of the respondents spoke French; those who did not (Arlet & Molleman 2007), while men typically cultivate were interviewed with the assistance of one local guide in cacao. In this area, therefore, cacao cultivation seems a each village who translated questions into the local Bantu possible alternative to other male economic activities, such language (Bajué) and the interviewees’ answers into French. as bushmeat hunting, fishing, and palm-wine production The majority of the interviews were conducted by one or (for personal consumption and for commercial sale), rather both of the authors, and occasionally by a volunteer from than as an alternative to slash-and-burn agriculture. The PGS, Sandrine Istas. economic returns from cacao cultivation, however, could Information was collected on family size, additional also be balanced against plans for palm oil cultivation, income, labor on cacao plantations (family or hired which involves a higher degree of forest destruction. workers), distance to the village, damage caused to cacao Crop-raiding often causes substantial losses to farmers pods and trees, the animal species responsible for damage living near wildlife habitats and protected areas (e.g., at each plantation, methods of crop protection, and the Perceptions of Cacao-Raiding Wildlife / 29 size of the harvest of the previous season (2003). In order in a separate analysis after being log-transformed; this was to promote greater objectivity in answers to the questions due to the expectation that the farther from the village, the posed, the responders were not made aware of the specific less any extra distance would matter. All analyses were purpose of this study, and knew that we were not going to performed in Statgraphics 5.0. assist them with pest control. For each animal perceived to be responsible for Results cacao crop damage, the damage was categorised by the interviewed person as one of four graded classes: ‘very bad Quantification of the agricultural system (4)’, ‘bad (3)’, ‘medium (2)’, or ‘little (1)’. The cumulative Most cacao growers were subsistence farmers and damage (summing the scores of all animals perceived to reported no other source of income; five growers reported be active in crop damage) was used as an estimate of total working as field-assistants in PGS, and two also engaged in perceived damage to a field. catching and drying fish. After the interviews (during the period of August- Surveyed families had on average six members, October 2004), we visited the plantations that were in use including an average of 3.5 children. Most had one cacao in 2004, usually accompanied by the man who worked plantation (67.7%), with a maximum of three (6.45%). each plantation, and we recorded visible damage and Larger families cultivated more cacao fields (regression: observed or inquired about methods used to repel animals F=7.5, N=28, R2=23.7%, P=0.012). In five households, and prevent raiding. We attempted to quantify damage by wives and children helped on the cacao plantation. randomly selecting 20 trees from each plantation (using Fourteen farmers worked in cooperation with others blind pointing) and counting pods, noting if there was during weeding, and helped with guarding neighbouring damage, and assessing which species might have caused plantations from crop-raiding animals during the harvest the damage. We tried to determine the crop-raiding season. One family utilized paid workers on the plantation animal species by studying the specific marks that were during the harvest. Out of the 39 cacao plantations visited, left on the pods or the trees, with input from our guides 75% were situated inside the forest at distances of >800 m or the owner of the field. The timing of this work was such from villages. Most cacao plantations dated from German that the interviews and plantation data were collected colonial times (1884-1916), when each man (the great- approximately two months before peak harvest time in grandfathers of present growers) had been assigned cacao 2004. As such, the farmer’s assessments of the degree of plants. damage/loss to their crops were based on their perceptions regarding the previous year’s harvest (2003). Information Perceived cacao damage on the 2004 cacao harvest was later provided by Manfred Farmers mentioned 12 species of mammals that they Epanda Aimé of PGS. believed damaged cacao pods in the plantations (this is based on N=43 plantations worked in 2003, the harvest year Data analysis on which the interviews were based; several plantations To compare family size with number of cacao fields were abandoned between the last harvest and 2004, the year per household, we used simple regression analysis. When of the study). These species are enumerated in Table 1. The the scores for all mentioned crop-raiding animals were most common crop-raiding animal was said to be squirrel summed across plantations, the resulting cumulative Sciuridae sp., with 83% of growers affected. Second most damage variable was nearly normally distributed and cited, and reported to be responsible for 43% of damage, ranged from 7 to 56, with a median and mean of 24. Based were three primate species: chimpanzee Pan troglodytes, on this, we made the decision to treat these damage scores agile mangabey Cercocebus agilis, and moustached guenon as a continuous variable and to then utilize regression Cercopithecus cephus. Farmers complained most frequently analysis in examining relationships between perceived about chimpanzees (74% of fields affected), followed by damage and the other measured factors. The subjective agile mangabeys (68%), moustached guenons (64%), damage-category scores were treated as ordinal variables gorillas Gorilla gorilla gorilla (29%), and grey-cheeked in multinomial logistic regression when analyses were mangabeys Lophocebus albigena (3.2%). While squirrels performed on the basis of separate animal species. To occurred in virtually all plantations, the degree of damage estimate the connection between cumulative damage and by these animals was not perceived to be as serious as the methods of crop protection, we performed a multiple damage done by other animals. regression with data from the 28 interviews, with fence, trap, guarding, scarecrow, making noise, and making Prevention of cacao loss smoke, as factors. To test whether cumulative damage in a Cacao growers varied in their strategies to prevent crop plantation increased with increasing distance to the village, losses to wildlife. Some growers stated that they camped in the distance between plantation and village was included their plantations during the period when ripe pods were in a regression analysis, first on its natural scale, and then present. The most frequently reported method to prevent 30 / Arlet & Molleman

Table 1. Percentage of cacao plantations affected by mammals (in 2003) and the distribution of damage across taxa. Results of interviews are combined across the three villages.

Percent of Fields Percentage Distribution of Crop-Raiding Species Affected (N=43) Damage Across Animal Taxa

Squirrel Sciuridae sp. 83.9 13.7 Chimpanzee Pan troglodytes 74.2 13.2 Agile mangabey Cercocebus agilis 67.7 12.2 Moustached guenon Cercopithecus cephus 64.5 10.7 Sitatunga Tragelaphus spekei 64.5 11.2 Porcupine Atherurus africanus 58.1 10.2 Palm rat Xerus erythropus 48.4 7.3 Duiker Cephalops sp. 45.2 7.8 Rat Cricetomys sp. 35.5 5.4 Gorilla Gorilla gorilla gorilla 29.0 5.9 Mongoose Herpestidae sp. 9.7 1.5 Grey-cheeked mangabey Lophocebus albigena 3.2 1.0 ______

crop loss was making noise (shouting, beating the trees or Reported methods of guarding with making noise metal drums) while guarding (91.7%). Growers actively (F=46.31, R2=76.0%, P<0.001%), and guarding alone guarded plantations during the harvest season (45.8%), (F=9.23, p=0.006), were those significantly associated staying throughout the day and night. They also set traps with farmers’ perception of lesser degrees of cacao crop (37.5%), and 8.3% shouted at animals when these were damage. noticed. Additional reported defensive methods included use of scarecrows (54.2%), or making smoke on the Site visits plantations (41.7%). Protective fences around plantations We described 760 trees and counted 7103 pods (2043 were used only by two growers. Some farmers believed ripe or ripening, and 5060 unripe). Sixteen percent of pods that the fungicides used to prevent cacao damage from were recorded as damaged when counted. One fourth of black pod (Phytophtora species), or the insecticides applied all trees and 5.4% of all pods were assessed as having been to control bugs of the family Miridae (common name: damaged by mammals. When the damage could be assigned capsids), were effective in repelling certain mammals. to a particular animal, most was by squirrel (3.0% of pods) Most growers (89%) hunted any animals encountered and sitatunga Tragelaphus spekei (1.6% of pods). We saw in the forest; most used traps, although two used guns, and very little damage to pods that clearly could be assigned to one, spears. Although bow and arrows were used by one primates (0.03% of pods were designated as damaged by grower to shoot crop-raiding squirrels, these weapons are agile mangabeys, and 0.01% by chimpanzees), and damage no longer used to shoot larger animals. To do so would by these animals was found only during our site visits in require poisoned arrows and the tracking of shot animals October when more pods were ripening. Other animals for several hours (until the poisoned animal collapses). that had damaged pods were duiker Cephalophus sp. This method has been replaced with the more effective (0.02% of observed pods), palm rat Cricetomys gambianus hunting methods that are now available, such as traps with (0.06%), rat Cricetomys sp. (0.6%), and porcupine Atherurus metal wires, and guns (as reported by one grower). africanus (0.06%). We saw some cases of insects damaging pods (0.2% of pods; mirids and some scaly bugs). Damage Effectiveness of crop loss prevention varied from removed pods to bite marks, but all damage The perceived cumulative damage was not any greater probably led to complete loss of the pod through rot. in the plantations further from the villages (regression: Severe black pod damage from the year 2003 was often F=0.5, R2=1.9%, P=0.49; Table 2). Similar results were still noticeable (dried pods in trees or on the ground) during obtained when distance +1 was log-transformed, and for all the 2004 surveys, and rotting pods were the most common animal types when analyzed separately using multinomial damage (7.7% of all pods). In addition, an unknown logistic regression. disease had caused gradual dying of the young shoots, Perceptions of Cacao-Raiding Wildlife / 31

Table 2. Distances to the Dja Faunal Reserve, perceived crop-raiding by primates, and cacao harvests in 2003 and 2004.

% of Harvest (kg) Damage Distance Number Attributed to DJR of Cacao to Total Per Field Total Per Field Community (km) Fields Primates 2003 2003 2004 2004 Malen V 24 24 35.1 455 19.0 440 18.3 Doumo-Pierre 18 9 35.7 550 61.1 615 68.3 Mimpala 12 6 50.0 81 13.5 96 16.0 starting at the tips and progressing to the larger branches and only two plantations being adjacent to the villages, it is (dieback). Some trees were so severely affected by this not surprising that distance to the village was not associated disease that they had died, due to leaf shedding from the with perceived damage by mammals in our analyses. This dying branches. In total, 20% of all trees examined in 2004 result is different from what we found in our examination had been affected by dieback. While in some plantations of crop-raiding by wildlife in subsistence farming, where all trees were severely affected, other plantations appeared the crops grown close to the villages were less damaged by free of the disease. Even within plantations, the dieback wildlife (Arlet & Molleman, 2007). The animals that were appeared to have a patchy distribution and growers often raiding cacao are all forest dwellers, including squirrels, compared it with fire damage. Trees with serious dieback primates, antelopes and porcupines; this is in contrast to were generally not bearing pods. what was found for the food crops that are grown near the villages, which are mainly affected by resident rodents (Arlet & Molleman 2007). In Mimpala village, which is DiscussioN closest to the Dja reserve, farmers thought that they lost Our interviews with cacao growers at the northern more of their 2003 cacao crop to primates than did the periphery of DFR complemented a simultaneous study on growers in the other two villages. This result could be due crop-raiding in subsistence farming in the same area (Arlet to higher wildlife densities nearer the reserve. & Molleman 2007). All farmers that we interviewed are Primates accounted for 43% of total perceived dependent on agriculture, hunting and gathering for their damage to cacao crops in the three villages. Cacao growers subsistence, and about 70% reported dependence on cacao complained mainly about crop-raiding by chimpanzees and crops as their only source of cash income during this study. agile mangabeys, and regarded them as important pests at There are few published studies on cacao crop-raiding (Bhat, the plantations. Agile mangabeys were also perceived as an Nair et al. 1981; Nchanji & Wright, 2002). Riley (2007) important pest for food crops in the studied villages (Arlet looked specifically into the relationship between humans & Molleman 2007). Cercopithecine monkeys, such as these and macaques in a community in Sulawesi, Indonesia, and agile mangabeys, are omnivorous and adaptable primates noted that crop-raiding on cacao was not (yet) a significant that may be perceived as the worst pests among primates problem. Another study (Priston, 2005), also in Sulawesi, because they have an ability to exploit both forest crops and found that monkeys damaged cacao more severely than did the edge between forests and human farming (Else, 1991; pigs, and also noted rodent damage to cacao pods. Thomas, 1991). The results presented here should be considered In contrast to the farmers’ perceptions based on the preliminary and interpreted with caution. This is largely results from interviews, the most actually observed damage due to the fact that our study relies heavily on interview during the visits to the plantations was by squirrel and data that are inherently subjective, rather than direct antelope. This may, however, be a function of the timing observations of animals raiding cacao. We have also taken of our data collection. Most pods were not yet ripe during some degree of liberty in our utilization of regression for the our field visits and it is likely that antelopes and squirrels analyses; i.e., the treatment of the cumulative damage scores are responsible only for a small proportion of damage to as a continuous variable when they are artificially created ripe pods. Moreover, antelopes can only damage pods by summing the interview-based ordinal (albeit graded) near to the ground. Body size and sizes of groups typical per-species damage scores for the plantations. Although of animal species are also known to affect perception of these caveats need to be kept in mind when interpreting damage (Hill, 1997; Hill, 2000; Linkie et al., 2007; Siex & the results, we believe that the main conclusions from the Struhsaker, 1999). It is also possible that the results of our study are robust. interviews could be affected by resentment of conservation With almost all cacao plantations being inside the forest intervention. Chimpanzees and gorillas, two of the primates 32 / Arlet & Molleman

which farmers reported to be significant crop-raiders, are and diseases which can destroy considerable proportions protected species and people of these three villages signed of harvests. Because growers perceive cacao crop-raiding an agreement with PGS not to kill apes. This was a major as a serious problem, raiding by protected animals may reason why we asked farmers only about possession of decrease local credibility in conservation efforts and the guns that could serve as crop-raiding deterrents, rather success of protected areas. Based on the results of our than asking about the specifics of their use. If these apes study, we feel that if the disease problems can be mitigated, are damaging cacao crops, then with decreasing gorilla and if cacao prices remain high enough, growers may be and chimpanzee populations in the DFR (Wang et al., motivated to invest more time in guarding plantations from 2007), and sufficient natural food sources remaining for crop-raiding wildlife, a cooperative strategy which appears the smaller populations, the crop-raiding by these primates to be effective in this area. If cacao production can become may decrease. more profitable, this may both reduce the pressure to grow The only method of crop-damage prevention and other crops that cause more deforestation (e.g., oil palm) protection perceived to be effective by the farmers was and decrease the time available for hunting further away active guarding - by making noise, and/or staying at from villagers’ homes. the plantations for long periods of time. A study around Kibale National Park (NP) in Uganda (Naughton-Treves 2001) also showed that guarding was most commonly used Acknowledgements by farmers to defend crops against animals, although at We are grateful to Mark Grote, Siiri-Lii Sandre, and that site guarding did not appear to reduce damage from several anonymous reviewers who have provided helpful wildlife. This difference may be explained by the degree comments. We would like to thank the participating of cooperation between the cacao growers near Dja in households and our guides, Bibem, Simon and Liboire, guarding plantations, something which was lacking in for their kind cooperation; Projet Grands Singes and, the area around Kibale NP (Naughton-Treves 2001). The in particular, Cecile Neel for the logistic support and salience of guarding in our data also may be a function hospitality; and Manfred Epanda Aimé and Sandrine Istas of factors specific to the other potential methods. With for their valuable help in the field. This study was made only two growers having guns, this factor could not be possible through financial support of the Schure-Beijerinck- included in the analysis. Traps or fences are not an effective Popping Fonds (to MEA), Gerard Molleman and Janny protection against animals that move in the canopy, or Tuinenga. During the writing of this paper the authors were against large animals like chimpanzees; these methods supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging would be expected to be targeted only toward porcupines (PO1 AG022500-01 and PO1 AG608761-10 to James R. that feed on pods that are close the ground. Carey), by the “Mobilitas” postdoctoral grant (MJD56), by Our observations indicate that plant diseases could the Estonian Ministry of Education and Science (targeted- have been the most pressing problem for cacao cultivation financing projects number 018000s09 and 0180122s08), in this area in 2004. Pod rot was common, and dieback and by the European Union through the European Regional affected 20% of cacao trees (up to 100% of the trees in some Development Fund (Center of Excellence FIBIR). plantations), often killing whole trees. This factor should receive attention by specialists, given that more than 80 species of fungus can cause dieback in cacao (Purdy et Literature Cited al., 1998). Dieback certainly was a major concern for the Arlet, M.E. & F. Molleman. 2007. Rodents damage crops more growers, although we did not systematically study their than wildlife in subsistence agriculture on the northern perception of its contribution to crop loss. periphery of Dja Reserve, Cameroon. International More detailed information clearly is needed to Journal of Pest Management 53: 237-243. quantify crop loss and effectiveness of methods to prevent ASB. 2007. Opportunities for Avoided Deforestation with crop-raiding. Additional research should include data Sustainable Benefits. In: UN Framework Convention on on plantation sizes, types, ages, and productivities; Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of Parties in Bali, identification of squirrel species; and utilization of Indonesia. exclusion experiments such as those conducted by Priston Assoumou, J. 1977. L’economie du Cacao. Delarge, Paris. (2009). Such data could then be compared with growers’ Bhat, S.K., C.P.R. Nair & D.N. Mathew. 1981. Mammalian perceptions of the impact of wildlife on harvests. This is not pests of cocoa in South-India. Tropical Pest Manage-ment to discount information on peoples’ perceptions, as this is 27: 297-302. important for designing effective strategies for mitigating Bos, M.M., I. Steffan-Dewenter & T. Tscharntke. 2007. The problems (Mekoya et al., 2008). Moreover, it seems evident contribution of cacao agroforests to the conservation from our data that in this area of Cameroon, cacao of lower canopy ant and beetle diversity in Indonesia. cultivation with very little capital input is significantly Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 2429-2444. impacted by crop-raiding by wild animals, insect pests, Perceptions of Cacao-Raiding Wildlife / 33

Delabie, J.H.C., B. Jahnyy, I.C. Do Nascimento, C.S.F. Mariano, McKinney, T. & C.O. Zamora. 2008. Crop-raiding of mango S. Lacau, S. Campiolo, S.M. Pphilpott & M. Leponce. 2007. fruits, Mangifera indica, by mantled bowlers (Alouatta Contribution of cocoa plantations to the conservation of palliata) in the Refugio de Vida Silvestre Curu, Costa native ants (Insecta : Hymenoptera : Formicidae) with a Rica. American Journal of Physical Anthropology Suppl. special emphasis on the Atlantic Forest fauna of southern 46: 153. Bahia, Brazil. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 2359- Mekoya, A., S.J. Oosting, S. Salvador Fernandez-Rivera & 2384. A.J. Van der Zijpp. 2008. Farmers’ perceptions about Duguma, B., J. Gockowski & J. Bakala. 2001. Smallholder exotic multipurpose fodder trees and constraints to their Cacao (Theobroma cacao Linn.) cultivation in agroforestry adoption. Agroforestry Systems 73: 141–153. systems of West and Central Africa: challenges and Mertens, B. & E.F. Lambin. 2000. Land-cover-change opportunities. Agroforestry Systems 51: 177-188. trajectories in southern Cameroon. Annals of the Dupain, J., P. Guislain, G.M. Nguenang, K. De Vleeschouwer. Association of American Geographers 90: 467-494. & L.Van Elsacker. 2004. High chimpanzee and gorilla Molleman, F., M.E. Arlet & A. Kop. 2005. List of butterfly densities in a non-protected area on the northern species found at the northern periphery of the Dja Faunal periphery of the Dja Faunal Reserve, Cameroon. Oryx 38: Reserve in Cameroon. http://entomology.ucdavis.edu/ 209-216. faculty/carey/index.cfm. Else, J.G. 1991. Non-human primates as pests. In: Primate Morf, N., H. Morrogh-Bernard & M. Kreutzen. 2008. response to environmental change. H.O. Box, ed. Chapman Identifying the economic and social impacts of crop- and Hall, London. Pp. 155-165. raiding by non-human primates on local livelihoods, in FAO. 1999. State of the world’s forests 1999. Food and Mount Rungwe, southwest, Tanzania. Folia Primatologica Agriculture Organization, Rome. 79: 362-363. Faria, D. & J. Baumgarten. 2007. Shade cacao plantations Naughton-Treves, L. 2001. Farmers, wildlife, and forest fringe. (Theobroma cacao) and bat conservation in southern In: African Rainforest Ecology and Conservation. W. Bahia, Brazil. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: 291-312. Weber, ed. Yale University Press, New Haven. Pp. 369- Faria, D., M.L.B. Paciencia, M. Dixo, R.R. Laps & J. Baumgarten. 384. 2007. Ferns, frogs, lizards, birds and bats in forest Nchanji, S.L.S. & R.G. Wright. 2002. Crop damage around fragments and shade cacao plantations in two contrasting northern Banyang-Mbo wildlife sanctuary. In: Albertrine landscapes in the Atlantic forest, Brazil. Biodiversity and rift technical report series. C.M. Hill, F.V. Osborn & A.J. Conservation 16: 2335-2357. Plumptre, eds. Wildlife Conservation Society. Pp. 68-77. Hockings, K.J. & T. Humle. 2009. Best Practice Guidelines Nyhus, P.J., R. Tilson & S. Sumianto. 2000. Crop-raiding for the Prevention and Mitigation of Conflict Between elephants and conservation implications at Way Kambas Humans and Great Apes. IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. Oryx 34: 262-274. Group, Gland, Switzerland. Priston, N.E.C. 2005. Crop-raiding by Macaca ochreata Hockings, K.J., J.R. Anderson, T. Matsuwa. 2009. Use of wild brunnescens in Sulawesi: Reality, Perceptions and and cultivated foods by chimpanzees at Bossou, Republic Outcomes for Conservation. Ph.D. thesis, University of of Guinea: feeding dynamics in a human-influenced Cambridge Cambridge. environment. American Journal of Primatology 71: 636- Priston, N.E.C. 2009. Exclosure plots as a mechanism for 646. quantifying damage to crops by primates. International Harvey, C.A. & J.A.G. Villlalobos. 2007. Agroforestry systems Journal of Pest Management 55: 243-249. conserve species-rich but modified assemblages of Priston, N.E.C. & S.J. Underdown. 2009. A simple method for tropical birds and bats. Biodiversity and Conservation 16: calculating the likelihood of crop damage by primates: an 2257-2292. epidemiological approach. International Journal of Pest Kagoro-Rugunda, G. 2004. Crop-raiding around Lake Mburo Management 55: 51-56. National Park, Uganda. African Journal of Ecology 42: 32- Purdy, L.H., R.A. Schmidt & K.P. Gramacho. 1998. Common 41. Names of Plant Diseases: Diseases of Cacao (Theobroma Hill, C.M. 1997. Crop-raiding by wild vertebrates: The farmer’s cacao L.). The American Phytopathological Society. http:// perspective in an agricultural community in western www.apsnet.org/online/common/names/cacao.asp Uganda. International Journal of Pest Management 43: Rice, R.A. & R. Greenberg. 2000. Cacao cultivation and the 77–84. conservation of biological diversity. Ambio 29: 167-173. Hill, C. M. 2000. Conflict of interest between people and Riley, E.P. 2007. The human-macaque interface: conservation baboons: Crop raiding in Uganda. International Journal implications of current and future overlap and conflict in of Primatology 21: 299–315. lore Lindu National Park, Sulawesi, Indonesia. American Linkie, M., Y. Dinata, A. Nofrianto & N. Leader-Williams. Anthropologist 109: 473-484. 2007. Patterns and perceptions of wildlife crop raiding Salgado-Mora, M.G., G. Ibarra-Nunez, J.E Macias-Samano & in and around Kerinci Seblat National Park, Sumatra. O. Lopez-Baez. 2007. Tree diversity in cacao plantations Animal Conservation 10:127–135. in the Soconusco area, Chiapas, Mexico. Interciencia 32: Mashusudan, M.D. 2003. Living amidst large wildlife: 763-768. Livestock and crop depredation by large mammals in Schroth, G. & C.A. Harvey. 2007. Biodiversity conservation in the interior villages of Bhadra Tiger Reserve, south India. cocoa production landscapes: an overview. Biodiversity Environmental Management 31: 466-475. and Conservation 16: 2237-2244. 34 / Arlet & Molleman

Siex, K.S. & T.T. Struhsaker. 1999. Colobus monkeys and UNCED. 1992. Report of UN Conference on Environment and coconuts: a study of perceived human-wildlife conflicts. Development. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Journal of Applied Ecology 36:1009–1020. Wang, B.C., V.L. Sork, M.T. Leong & T.B. Smith. 2007. Steffan-Dewenter, I., M. Kessler, J. Barkmann, M.M. Bos, D. Hunting of mammals reduces seed removal and Buchori, S. Erasmi, H. Faust, G. Gerold, K. Glenk, S.R. dispersal of the afrotropical tree Antrocaryon klaineanum Gradstein , E. Guhardja, M. Harteveld, D. Herteld, P. (Anacardiaceae). Biotropica 39: 340-347. Hohn, M. Kappas, S. Kohler, C. Leuschner, M. Maertens, Warren, Y., B. Buba & C. Ross. 2007. Patterns of crop-raiding R. Marggraf, S. Migge-Kleian, J. Mogea, R. Pitopang, M. by wild and domestic animals near Gashaka Gumti Schaseffer, S. Schwarze, S.G. Sporn, A. Steingrebbe, S.S. National Park, Nigeria. International Journal of Pest Tjitrosoedirdjo, S. Tjitrosoemito, A. Twele, R. Weber, L. Management 53: 207-216. Woltmann, M. Zeller & T. Tscharntke. 2007. Tradeoffs between income, biodiversity, and ecosystem functioning during tropical rainforest conversion and agroforestry Authors’ Contact Information intensification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104: 4973-4978. Corresponding author: Małgorzata E. Arlet, Institute Thomas, S.C. 1991. Population densities and patterns of habitat of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, use among anthropoid primates of the Ituri Forest. Vanemuise 46, EE-51014 Tartu, Estonia. Email: maarlet@ Biotropica 23: 68-83. yahoo.com. Tweheyo, M., C.M. Hill & J. Obua. 2005. Patterns of crop raiding by primates around the Budongo Forest Reserve, Freerk Molleman, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, Uganda. Wildlife Biology 11: 237-247. University of Tartu, Vanemuise 46, EE-51014 Tartu, Estonia. Email: [email protected].

Cacao plantation near Doumo Photograph by Małgorzata Arlet