Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Action: Increase resources for managing protected areas Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Key messages

Read our guidance on Key messages before continuing

  • One study evaluated the effects on mammals of increasing resources for managing protected areas. This study was in Tanzania.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Species richness (1 study): A site comparison study in Tanzania found that mammal species richness was higher in a well-resourced national park, than in a less well-resourced forest reserve.

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Abundance (1 study): A site comparison study Tanzania found that there were greater occupancy rates or relative abundances of most mammal species in a well-resourced national park than in a less well-resourced forest reserve.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

Supporting evidence from individual studies

1 

A site comparison study in 2013–2014 in two forested protected areas in the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania (Hegerl et al. 2017) found that in a well-resourced protected national park, there was greater mammal species richness and occupancy rates or relative abundances for most mammal species compared to those in a forest reserve managed with fewer resources. Estimated mammal species richness was higher in the national park (29 species) than in the forest reserve (18 species). Modelled occupancy rates (a measure of the proportion of sites used by species) were higher in the national park compared to the forest reserve for three species and were lower for one species. For species occurring at both sites, but in insufficient numbers to perform occupancy modelling, relative abundances were higher in the national park compared to the forest reserve for five species and were lower for one species. One site was a 177-km2 forest within a well-resourced national park where poaching was considered to be rare. The other was a 200-km2 forest reserve, managed with fewer resources and where poaching for bushmeat occurred. Each area was surveyed using camera traps, over 917 camera-trap days in the national park and 850 camera-trap days in the forest reserve, between July 2013 and February 2014.

Referenced papers

Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.