Social Dimensions and Human-Wildlife Conflict in Global Perspectives
Introduction and Research Background: Dr. Carla Archibald
Dr. Carla Archibald is an Alfred Deakin Postdoctoral Fellow at Deakin University specializing in the intersection of agriculture, food systems, and wildlife conservation.
Undergraduate Background: She studied Wildlife Science at the University of Queensland (UQ) in Brisbane. Her early career motivation was driven by a childhood obsession with birds, which led her to pursue wildlife education.
Career Trajectory:
Following graduation, she worked as an ecologist for approximately six months.
She transitioned out of consulting because the work primarily involved managing land clearing for urban and infrastructure developments after approvals had already been granted, leaving little room for conservation influence.
She returned to academia for an Honors year focused on urban restoration and its benefits for bird species.
She worked as a research assistant on diverse projects, including invasive species management, macaw conservation in the Amazon, and high-level policy work with the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Her PhD research investigated the social and environmental impacts of private land conservation.
Current Research Focus:
Investigating biodiversity-friendly farming practices.
Analyzing consumer behavior to promote diets that favor biodiversity.
Modeling how climate change impacts species and the perceptions of landholders.
Case studies on koalas in New South Wales.
Theoretical Framework: Social Dimensions of Wildlife Management
The central premise of the lecture is that wildlife management is essentially humans management. Failing to address the social dimension frequently leads to the failure of ecological interventions.
Pre-lecture Context:
Previous weeks covered species interactions, the importance of long-term perspectives on ecology (Guest lecture by Nick Porch), and long-term monitoring (Prerecorded content by John White).
Recent topics included DNA techniques for species sampling.
Indigenous Perspectives on Land Management:
Humans have not always modified landscapes negatively. Indigenous Australians have managed land for tens of thousands of years through aquaculture, nomadic, and agricultural systems.
Management follows "healthy country" philosophies that benefit both food security and nature.
Recommended Resources: "Dark Emu" by Bruce Pascoe and "Sand Talk" by Tyson Yunkaporta (a Deakin University employee).
Anthropogenic Impacts on Wildlife Populations
Human presence is ubiquitous, leading to intensified overlaps between people and wildlife. This closeness is driven by:
Habitat Loss: Clearing land for urban areas and cropping.
Degradation: Activities like livestock grazing in natural pastures, which destroys the grasslands needed by native species.
Novel Environments: Urbanization creates new niches that benefit specific species like pigeons, spotted doves, lorikeets, noisy miners, and ringtail possums.
Statistical Impact: Approximately of terrestrial wildlife is negatively impacted by agricultural systems.
Non-Land Based Impacts:
Road collisions (a significant issue in Tasmania).
Shipping route interference.
Energy production (coal, wind farms, solar fields).
Example: The Black-throated Finch in Queensland lost massive habitat due to the establishment of new mining operations.
Standard Classification System for Threats:
Housing and urban development.
Agriculture and aquaculture.
Energy production and mining (direct loss and indirect climate drivers).
Pollution (notably impactful for amphibians).
Climate change and severe weather events (e.g., bushfires in Australia).
Conflict and Services: The Impact of Wildlife on Human Populations
Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) arises when wildlife poses a real or perceived threat to human interests.
Categories of Wildlife Dis-services:
Human Safety: Predators (sharks, crocodiles, tigers) causing injury or death.
Financial Damage: Wombats, cockatoos (galahs/corellas), and kangaroos damaging crops, pastures, or infrastructure.
Livestock Predation: Dingoes, wolves, and large cats eating stock.
Public Nuisance: Noise, smell, and property damage from species like seagulls at the MCG, or bin chickens (white ibis).
Disease Transmission: Bats and various zoonotic outbreaks.
Categories of Conflict Intensity:
Dispute: A simple, specific incident (e.g., a possum eating garden tomatoes) solvable through physical barriers like netting.
Underlying Conflict: A recurring issue that remains unsatisfactorily resolved.
Deep-Rooted Conflict: Values or social identities are threatened (e.g., the dingo debate in Australia or wild horses in the Alps). Solutions at this level are extremely complex.
Wildlife Services (Positive Impacts):
Pollination.
Seed dispersal.
Aesthetic and recreational value.
Carbon Sequestration: Ewan mentions a student project identifying how bandicoots facilitate carbon sequestration in agricultural soils.
Identification Challenges:
Often, guilt is misplaced. For example, damage attributed to possums may actually be caused by black rats. There are between and vertebrate species in Australia, making it difficult for the public to identify them accurately (e.g., mistaking non-venomous tree snakes for Eastern Brown Snakes).
Case Study 1: Flying Fox Management at the Royal Botanic Gardens
Species: Grey-headed Flying Fox ().
Ecological Role: Critical for forest health through pollination and long-distance seed dispersal (individuals can move several thousand kilometers annually).
Conflict Background:
In 1986, a permanent colony established in the Royal Botanic Gardens (RBG) in Melbourne.
Populations reached to individuals (peak breeding season).
By 2002, they occupied of the garden area.
Public Complaints: Excessive noise, intense smell, droppings, and damage to heritage-listed botanical specimens.
Management Strategy: Dispersal (Relocation).
This is a highly regulated process. Flying foxes are a protected species under the Nature Conservation Act (QLD), the Wildlife Conservation Act (VIC), and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (VIC).
Implementation: Only authorized personnel with a license to control wildlife can manage dispersal.
Relocation Outcome: In 2003, the colony was successfully moved to Yarra Bend Park in Kew.
Recent Updates: The colony returned to RBG in late 2024. A new dispersal program was initiated in April 2024.
Dispersal Protocols (Code of Practice):
Actions must be non-lethal (primarily using lights and noise).
Dispersal only occurs at dawn or dusk (fly-in/fly-out times).
Actions must cease if a bat is found on the ground or injured.
Maximum duration: per session.
Prohibited during late-stage pregnancy or while dependent young are present.
Monitoring: Required for at least post-action.
Case Study 2: Managing Wildlife across Land Tenures
The Patchwork Complexity: Species do not observe property or state boundaries. Management is complicated by varying laws across local, state, and international lines.
Current Status of Land in Australia:
of land is dedicated to protected areas.
of land is private/freehold or leasehold land.
Primary Land Tenure Types:
Freehold: Private land (e.g., homes, farms).
Leasehold: Land rented from the government (common in central Australia).
Protected Areas: Includes Government (National Parks), Shared/Joint Governance (Indigenous/Government collaborations), Private Governance (managed by individuals or NGOs like AWC and Bush Heritage), and Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs).
Private Land Conservation:
Trusts (e.g., Trust for Nature, Biodiversity Conservation Trust) create permanent conservation covenants on private titles.
Challenges: High acquisition costs, need for ongoing landholder engagement, and conflicting priorities (financial agricultural yields vs. conservation).
Ecological Significance: Research shows private land often protects specific at-risk vegetation types that are under-represented in larger National Parks.
Movement Ecology Study: Jeff K from the Biodiversity Conservation Trust used fluorescent dye to track gecko movement through agricultural landscapes to determine how fence-line vegetation and scattered trees maintain connectivity.
Case Study 3: Transboundary Conservation and Migratory Shorebirds
Issue: Many threatened species occur along national borders, requiring international cooperation that is often hindered by politics.
Migratory Corridors: Australia is part of the East Asian-Australasian Flyway and the Western Pacific Flyway.
Iconic Example: The Bar-tailed Godwit, bird code "E7".
In 2007, E7 was tracked flying from Alaska to New Zealand nonstop.
Stats: Over traveled in just .
Threats Along Flyways:
Stopover habitat loss/coastal development (particularly in China and Southeast Asia).
Hunting: At least half of the species on the flyway are harvested above sustainable thresholds.
Climate change: Melting Arctic breeding grounds and mismatched food availability timing.
Management Frameworks:
International Treaties: JAMBA (Japan), CAMBA (China), ROKAMBA (Republic of Korea).
The Ramsar Convention: Protects specific important wetlands (e.g., Mai Po in Hong Kong).
Data sharing and cross-border spatial planning are essential for survival.
Questions & Discussion
Wind Farms: A student questioned the balance of wind farms on farmland. Wind farms on existing cleared land are generally positive but can be destructive if placed in flyways or if habitat is cleared (e.g., Northern Quoll habitat clearing in North Queensland).
Predators in Sri Lanka: Lakshita discussed leopards entering villages in Sri Lanka, leading to retaliation/poisoning.
Compensation Schemes: Paying farmers for lost livestock can reduce killings.
Research: A study in Mumbai, India, found that urban leopards save approximately per year by predating on stray dogs that carry rabies.
Translocation Ethics: Discussions touched on whether moving "problem" predators to zoos is humane or if death is a more ethical outcome for intelligent, wide-ranging carnivores.
Novel Ecosystems: Carla Archibald noted that some non-native plants/weeds in urban gardens actually provide essential habitat for native birds, suggesting we need to look beyond "pure" ecology for win-win solutions in 2025.