Open AccessPerceptions of vulture supplementary feeding site managers and potential hidden risks to avian scavengers
Author(s) -
Brink Christiaan W.,
Santangeli Andrea,
Amar Arjun,
Wolter Kerri,
Tate Gareth,
Krüger Sonja,
Tucker Andrew S.,
Thomson Robert L.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
conservation science and practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2578-4854
DOI - 10.1111/csp2.237
Subject(s) - vulture , livestock , context (archaeology) , electrocution , carrion , geography , business , provisioning , environmental resource management , ecology , medicine , biology , engineering , environmental science , emergency medicine , telecommunications , archaeology , forestry
Under the current African vulture crisis, supplementary feeding sites (SFS), which provide carrion resources, have become a popular conservation tool to address vulture declines. In South Africa, this practice is unregulated and the context in which SFS operate and their adherence to best management practices is currently unknown. In this study, we conducted a survey with SFS managers regarding the management of their SFS to evaluate potential conservation implications of different practices. Half of the SFS surveyed were associated with livestock farming. Overall, most managers (84%) perceived some benefit from running an SFS, largely attributed to cleaning services provided by vultures. Over half of the managers perceived no disadvantages from running SFS. We found a positive correlation between numbers of vultures seen at SFS and the amount of food provided there. Despite unintentional and intentional poisoning being identified by experts as the most critical threats to vultures in Southern Africa, only 47 and 24% of managers, respectively, listed these as potential threats to vultures, highlighting limited understanding of current vulture conservation issues. Most managers (85%) vetted carcasses for provisioning suitability based on whether they had been treated with veterinary drugs, but relatively few managers (10%) did the same for lead (Pb) contamination. Only 30% of managers considered threats to vultures when they decided on a location for their SFS. Overall, this study unveils that at many SFS, safety conditions are not met and vultures may be exposed to risks, such as the ingestion of toxic substances (e.g., Pb) or electrocution by energy infrastructure. To minimize unintended negative consequences from SFS, it will be essential to increase the interaction between SFS managers and conservation practitioners, to increase the flow of information on best management practices and enforce stringent and clear guidelines that minimize any risks to vultures.