Search

Ranger‐led law enforcement patrols are the primary, site‐level response to – and the most common source of data on – illegal activity threatening wildlife in protected areas. Yet evidence that patrols effectively deter rule‐breaking is limited, and common management metrics for evaluating deterrence, which use ranger‐collected data, are particularly vulnerable to bias. "Differenced plots" (of the association between change in patrol effort and subsequent change in illegal activity) were recently proposed as a simple, new metric for deterrence, which, in tests with simulated patrol data, were more robust than the common alternatives. Here, we trial application of differenced plots to real patrol data collected in four protected areas, and explore methods for applying the metric in practice, using two indicators of rule‐breaking: snares, and people. We find evidence which is consistent with deterrence in some but not all sites, over shorter timescales than observed hitherto: increases in patrol effort were associated with subsequent reductions in snaring in one site, and in the presence of people in two sites. However, whether pressure on wildlife had been reduced or merely displaced was unclear from differenced plots, nor could the metric confirm absence of deterrence, raising questions for future applications. Our findings suggest differenced plots can be a useful metric, particularly for exploring variation in deterrence within sites, but should be applied and interpreted with care, and further work is urgently needed to determine whether and how patrols deter illegal activity, and to evaluate the effect reliably. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hunting is a primary driver of biodiversity loss across South-east Asia. Within Cambodia, the use of wire snares to capture wildlife is a severe threat in protected areas but there have been few studies of the behaviour of hunters from local communities. Here, we combine the unmatched count technique with direct questioning to estimate the prevalence of hunting behaviours and wildlife consumption amongst 705 households living within Keo Seima Wildlife Sanctuary, Cambodia. We assessed respondents' knowledge of rules, and their perceptions of patrols responsible for enforcing rules. Estimates of hunting behaviour were variable: results from the unmatched count technique were inconclusive, and direct questioning revealed 9% of households hunted, and 20% set snares around farms to prevent wildlife eating crops. Hunting with domestic dogs was the method most commonly used to catch wildlife (87% of households owned dogs). Wild meat was consumed by 84% of households, and was most frequently bought or caught, but also gifted. We detected a high awareness of conservation rules, but low awareness of punishments and penalties, with wildlife depletion, rather than the risk of being caught by patrols, causing the greatest reduction in hunting. Our findings demonstrate the challenges associated with reliably estimating rule-breaking behaviour and highlight the need to incorporate careful triangulation into study design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]