Browsing by Subject "Five Domains Model"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Open Access
    Conflict and coexistence: an assessment of welfare outcomes for the methods used to manage chacma baboon (Papio ursinus) on the Cape Peninsula, South Africa
    (2026) Caspers, Catharina; O'riain, Justin; Mormile, Joselyn; Beamish, Esme; Allen, Benjamin
    Conservation conflicts associated with urban wildlife management are commonplace and arise from disagreements about the ethical and welfare implications of different management methods. On South Africa's Cape Peninsula, the management of chacma baboons (Papio ursinus) has become increasingly contentious. Much of the conflict amongst stakeholders' centres around their differing perceptions of the ethical and welfare impacts of different management approaches and methods. However, the welfare implications of these management strategies are poorly understood. In this study, I attempted the first expert assessment of the welfare impacts of various management methods using both the Five Domains Model and the Sharp and Saunders Humaneness Assessment framework. I categorised and analysed 17 management methods, assessing their welfare impacts through expert panel evaluations and structured welfare assessment models. Additionally, I examined the mortality records (2017-2024 n = 423) of the Peninsula's baboon population from the current service provider NCC environmental services and Esme K. Beamish, to explore the influence of age class, sex, active management versus no management of baboon troops and season on causes of death. I classified causes of death into natural causes (such as age, disease, infanticide) and urban causes (such as vehicles, dogs, poisoning) to understand how management influences baboon mortality as a welfare proxy. My findings show that the handling intensity of management methods significantly increased welfare costs, irrespective of lethality, and group-based interventions produced slightly worse welfare outcomes than individually applied methods. Among lethal methods, head shooting was the most humane and for non-lethal methods electric fencing was the most humane. Rangers herding baboons without paintball markers caused moderate welfare impacts, while rangers with paintball markers increased harm slightly by introducing a painful aversive stimulus. Mortality analysis revealed that causes of death varied significantly by age and sex, with adult and subadult females experiencing disproportionately high urban causes of death. Causes of death varied significantly by troop, and unmanaged troops exhibited significantly higher urban mortality, reinforcing the importance of management in mitigating human-baboon conflict. The proportion of urban mortality increased from 23.7% to 50.0% during the suspension of lethal management, then declined to 27.3% after resumption; the post-resumption decline was significant versus suspension but not different from baseline, and only subadult males showed a significant increase during suspension. During a short moratorium on rangers' use of paintball markers, urban mortality rose (20% before, 80% during, 28.6% after), but these changes were not statistically significant (small sample size). The seasonal analysis shows that urban deaths peak in autumn (March-May) and winter (June-August). The results suggest that there may be some trade-offs between the welfare costs and effectiveness of management methods in deterring baboons from urban areas, although methods that are both effective and less welfare costly are available. This research provides a robust framework for evaluating urban wildlife management strategies, informing evidence-based policy decisions and reducing conservation conflicts, while improving animal welfare.