Local people’s perceptions of wildlife species in two distinct landscapes of Northern Tanzania

Local attitudes towards wildlife species are key for the coexistence between humans and wildlife. To assess how economic, social, and psychological factors affect human perception of wildlife species we conducted questionnaire surveys in two ecologically and culturally distinct rural areas of Northern Tanzania (Mbulu Plateau highlands and Rift Valley lowlands). Using responses of 356 individuals we determined local preferences for population sizes of 31 wildlife species. For five of these species or species groups (rodents, hyena, birds of prey, African elephant, jackal), more than 30% of participants desired a population decline. To investigate correlates for desired population reductions of these species, we ran species-specific (five listed species and African lion) and study area-specific generalized linear mixed models that accounted for spatial autocorrelation. Using these models we assessed relationships between the likelihood of respondents desiring a population decline and six hypothesized explanatory variables: gender; age; ethnicity, and wealth of participant; perceived frequency of negative interactions with; and fear of each species. In both the highland and lowland and for all species, participants that perceived higher instances of negative interactions with wildlife were more likely to prefer smaller future populations, but relationships between perceived frequency of negative interactions and attitudes were often non-linear. People who feared a species were also more likely to desire a population decline. Other variables (gender, age, ethnicity, wealth) showed species- and area-level variations, and we observed substantial spatial variation in expressed attitudes towards species. Thus, negative attitudes towards wildlife appear to be mainly associated with past (negative) experiences and fear, but not necessarily with associated costs or socio-demographic variables. To ensure coexistence between wildlife and humans, we suggest (1) wildlife damage prevention through technical measures and (2) educational initiatives to increase positive attitudes towards wildlife.