Implement monitoring surveillance strategies (e.g. SMART) or use monitoring data to improve effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement patrols

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

60%
Certainty

30%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

This intervention entails using surveillance strategies, such as SMART (http://smartconservationtools.org/), or monitoring data, such as spatial data on hunting intensity and/or primate density, to improve the efficiency of law enforcement patrols. For example, an analysis by N’Goran et al. (2012) of monitoring and patrol data from Taï National Park, Côte d’Ivoire, found that patrol teams spent more time in areas of high human activity and poaching, implying that the monitoring data helped to guide law enforcement patrols to areas where hunting was concentrated, thereby increasing their efficiency. However, the study did not relate patrol effort to primate densities and therefore conclusions could not be drawn about the effectiveness of patrols.

The regular patrolling of primate habitat by anti-poaching teams and the removing of snares by snare-removal teams that may form part of anti-poaching patrols are discussed separately under ‘Conduct regular anti-poaching patrols’ and ‘Regularly de-activate/remove ground snares’. The training and the providing of equipment to anti-poaching patrols is discussed under ‘Provide training to anti-poaching ranger patrols’, and ‘Provide better equipment (e.g. guns) to anti-poaching ranger patrols’.

N’Goran P., Boesch C., Mundry R., N’Goran E.N., Herbinger I., Yapi F.A. & Kühl H.S. (2012) Hunting, law enforcement, and African primate conservation. Conservation Biology, 3, 565–571.

Study locations

Key messages

One before-and-after study in Nigeria found that more gorillas and chimpanzees were observed after the implementation of law enforcement and a monitoring system.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A before-and-after trial in 2009-2013 in tropical forest in the Mbe Mountains, Nigeria found that more Cross River gorilla Gorilla gorilla diehli and Nigeria-Cameroon chimpanzee Pan troglodytes ellioti groups were observed after the implementation of a system for law enforcement and monitoring. The number of observed gorilla groups and sleeping nests increased from 4 to 22 groups and from 29 to 80 nests. The number of chimpanzee groups and sleeping nests increased from 4 to 15 groups and 3 to 53 nests. The number of patrol days increased from 343 to 830 days, and patrol effort increased from 1,500 to 5,000 km/year. Encounter rates of wire snares, gunshots heard, used cartridges, and hunting camps, decreased from 1.3 to 0.27/km, 0.45 to 0.02/km, 1.56 to 0.08/km, and 0.05 to 0.002/km, respectively. No statistical tests were carried out to determine whether this difference was significant. The system used the Cyber Tracker software run on handheld computers with GPS capabilities for field data collection. Data collected with this system can be downloaded directly to computers and quickly analysed allowing timely production of feedback for patrol planning and implementation.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Imong I., Eban J. & Mengjo C. (2014) Using technology to save gorillas in the Mbe Mountains. Gorilla Journal, 48, 16-17.

Please cite as:

Junker, J., Kühl, H.S., Orth, L., Smith, R.K., Petrovan, S.O. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Primate Conservation. Pages 431-482 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Primate Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Implement community control of patrolling, banning hunting and removing snares Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	3	Synopsis Link
Implement road blocks to inspect cars for illegal primate bushmeat Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Conduct regular anti-poaching patrols Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	5	Synopsis Link