Bush tucker, bush pets, and bush threats: Cooperative management of feral animals in Australia's Kakadu National Park

被引:75
作者
Robinson, CJ
Smyth, D
Whitehead, PJ
机构
[1] Univ New S Wales, Australian Def Force Acad, Sch Phys Environm & Math Sci, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia
[2] James Cook Univ N Queensland, Sch Trop Environm Studies & Geog, Atherton, Qld 4883, Australia
[3] Charles Darwin Univ, Key Ctr Trop Wildlife Management, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia
关键词
adaptive management; bush pets; bush tucker; co-management; feral animal damage; indigenous ecological knowledge;
D O I
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00196.x
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Although feral animal management is often based on the proposition that introduced species threaten ecological and conservation values, that view is not necessarily shared by all stakeholders, including those indigenous people who own and co-manage Kakadu National Park with Australia's federal government Drawing on field-based interviews with the Jawoyn people, we found that these indigenous people categorize water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) as an important food source (tucker), view horses (Equus caballus) as bush pets, and consider pigs (Sus scrofa) a threat to their lands. As a result, Jawoyn people want more water buffalo in the park, have high tolerance of environmental damage caused by horses, and are open to the idea that pig population densities should be reduced. Jawoyn also advocate an adaptive and participatory approach to feral animal control so that the consequences of any management actions can be properly understood before irrevocable change occurs. These findings highlight one example of how indigenous people's ecological knowledge has adapted in response to changing landscapes and community aspirations. Co-management strategies that aim to incorporate the dynamics of indigenous peoples views need to start with issues on which there is agreement between different groups and take a cautious approach to joint exploration of more contentious issues. That approach should include ongoing and on-site monitoring so that the consequences of management actions can be properly understood and comprehensively negotiated by all parties.
引用
收藏
页码:1385 / 1391
页数:7
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2001, WORKING COUNTRY CONT
[2]  
Baker R., 2001, Working on country: contemporary indigenous management of Australia's lands and coastal regions
[3]  
Berkes F, 1998, LINKING SOCIAL ECOLO, DOI [10.1017/CBO9780511541957, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511541957]
[4]   Indigenous peoples and protected areas at the World Parks Congress [J].
Brosius, JP .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2004, 18 (03) :609-612
[5]   DOES DINGO PREDATION OR BUFFALO COMPETITION REGULATE FERAL PIG-POPULATIONS IN THE AUSTRALIAN WET-DRY TROPICS - AN EXPERIMENTAL-STUDY [J].
CORBETT, L .
WILDLIFE RESEARCH, 1995, 22 (01) :65-74
[6]   Role of ecological history in invasive species management and conservation [J].
Donlan, CJ ;
Martin, PS .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2004, 18 (01) :267-269
[7]   Toward a strategy for undertaking cross-cultural collaborative research [J].
Gibbs, M .
SOCIETY & NATURAL RESOURCES, 2001, 14 (08) :673-687
[8]  
*KAK BOARD MAN, 1999, PLAN MAN RESP KAK NA
[9]  
Letts G. A., 1979, FERAL ANIMALS NO TER
[10]   Nonindigenous species: Ecological explanation, environmental ethics, and public policy [J].
Lodge, DM ;
Shrader-Frechette, K .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2003, 17 (01) :31-37