The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Bushmeat hunting by communities adjacent to the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania: the importance of livestock ownership and alternative sources of protein and income
Abstract
Illegal hunting of resident and migratory herbivores is widespread in the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. To devise effective strategies to reduce levels of hunting, information is required on why people are involved in illegal hunting and the role of bushmeat in the local economy. Participation in hunting may be influenced by measures of relative wealth, including livestock ownership, means of generating cash income and access to alternative sources of meat. Data came from 300 individuals responding to a questionnaire in 10 villages, from responses by 359 people in 24 group discussions in another 12 villages, and from 552 people arrested and interviewed in the National Park. A smaller proportion of individual respondents (32%) than group respondents (57%) volunteered that they participated in illegal hunting. Most individual and group respondents were subsistence farmers who considered bushmeat to be a source of protein and a means of generating cash income. Three-quarters of those arrested participated in hunting primarily to generate cash income and a quarter claimed that they only hunted to obtain food. Participation in illegal hunting decreased as wealth in terms of the number of sheep and goats owned increased. People with access to alternative means of generating income or acquiring protein were also less likely to be involved in illegal hunting. Arrested respondents were typically young adult males with low incomes and few or no livestock. Illegal hunting was not reduced by participation in community-based conservation pro-grammes. Results suggested that between 52 000 and 60 000 people participated in illegal hunting within protected areas, and that many young men (approximately 5200) derived their primary source of income from hunting.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Ecological and financial impacts of illegal bushmeat trade in Zimbabwe
Lindsey, P. A., Romañach, S. S., Tambling, C. J., Chartier, K., & Groom, R. (2011) · Oryx · doi:10.1017/s0030605310000153 · Cited by 116
Knapp, E. J. (2012) · Tropical Conservation Science · doi:10.1177/194008291200500403 · Cited by 111
Dynamics and underlying causes of illegal bushmeat trade in Zimbabwe
Lindsey, P. A., Romañach, S. S., Matema, S., Matema, C., Mupamhadzi, I., & Muvengwi, J. (2011) · Oryx · doi:10.1017/s0030605310001274 · Cited by 111
Wildlife in the life of local people of the semi-arid Argentine Chaco
Altrichter, M. (2006) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-005-0307-5 · Cited by 61
Responses to alternative rainfall regimes and antipoaching in a migratory system
Holdo, R. M., Galvin, K. A., Knapp, E., Polasky, S., Hilborn, R., & Holt, R. D. (2010) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/08-0780.1 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Loibooki, M., Hofer, H., Campbell, K. L. I., & East, M. L.
- Venue
- Environmental Conservation
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2002-09
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 391-398
- ISSN
- 0376-8929 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-4387
- OpenAlex
- W2108629081
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bushmeat hunting by communities adjacent to the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania: the importance of livestock ownership and alternative sources of protein and income. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0376892902000279
- The paper
- Loibooki, M., Hofer, H., Campbell, K. L. I., & East, M. L. (2002). Bushmeat hunting by communities adjacent to the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania: the importance of livestock ownership and alternative sources of protein and income. Environmental Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0376892902000279
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.