Pandas and People. Edited by Jianguo Liu, Vanessa Hull, Wu Yang, Andrés Viña, Xiaodong Chen, Zhiyun Ouyang, and Hemin Zhang. © Oxford University Press 2016. Published 2016 by Oxford University Press.

CHAPTER 4

Pandas–People Coexistence and CompetitionVanessa Hull, Jindong Zhang, wei liu, Jinyan Huang, Shiqiang Zhou, Scott Bearer, weihua Xu, mao-Ning tuanmu, andrés Viña, Hemin Zhang, Zhiyun ouyang, and Jianguo liu

4.1 Introduction

With the expansion of the human population in the last few centuries, human–wildlife interactions are increasing like never before (Carter et al., 2014, Woodroffe et al., 2005). Nearly all wildlife popula-tions and associated habitats have been altered by humans in a multitude of ways. Examples include poaching, livestock grazing, resource extraction, pollution, and climate change (Pimm and Raven, 2000). Wildlife in turn affect humans in numer-ous ways, including destruction of crops, killing livestock and people, providing economic income through wildlife tourism, and controlling pests (Carter et  al., 2014). Human–wildlife interactions can be framed from many different perspectives, but two of the most common contrasting paradigms are human–wildlife competition and human–wildlife coexistence (Woodroffe et  al., 2005). Competition occurs when humans and wildlife engage in antag-onistic interactions with one another due to limited available resources (Treves and Karanth, 2003, Woodroffe et al., 2005). Coexistence can be achieved when one or both sides have adapted to the other’s presence so that both can be sustained while shar-ing the same space (Madden, 2004, Woodroffe et al., 2005). Understanding factors that trigger competi-tion and those that foster coexistence can help guide conservation policy and management planning into the future to promote sustainability of coupled human–wildlife systems.

The giant panda is one endangered species that has been profoundly shaped by human–wildlife interactions. As outlined in Chapter 1, giant pandas and humans have a long and complex history of interacting with one another. The story of human–panda interactions is one that can be told from many different perspectives, and themes of com-petition and coexistence are interwoven even in the earliest records of ancient China (Chapter  1). The portrayal of pandas as peaceful mountain-dwelling neighbors was juxtaposed against the harvest of pandas by elites for sport and fur (Schaller, 1994). The dominant pattern for centuries has been coex-istence, considering that pandas have survived in the face of considerable human development pres-sures when many other large mammals have not. For example, elephants are almost extinct in China and rhinos, gibbons, and snub-nosed monkeys have nearly disappeared due to the combined ef-fects of hunting and habitat loss (Corlett, 2007). A survey of over 50 reserves in South China found “very few signs of large and medium-sized mam-mals” (Fellowes et al., 2004, cited in Corlett, 2007). The subspecies of tiger once living in South China has recently been extirpated (Tilson et al., 2004). So have the leopard and gray wolf, with several other species at regional risk (Lau et al., 2010). Pandas are also found to persist at densities higher than many other bears around the world, which highlights dif-ferences in their biology (Garshelis, 2004), and a higher capacity to coexist with people (Hull et al.,

Thanksforyourinterest!Wearen’tabletoshowtheentirechapter.Tobuy“PandasandPeople,CouplingHumanandNaturalSystemsforSustainability”pleasevisit:OxfordUniversityPressorAmazon.comScrolldowntoviewthechapter’ssummaryandcitationlist.

Pa N d a S – P e o P l e C o e X i S t e N C e a N d   C o m P e t i t i o N 57

worthwhile for fostering coexistence and serves as a good complement to exclusionary policies like zoning.

4.5 Summary

Humans have interacted with wildlife in diverse ways, ranging from coexistence to competition. In this chapter, we explored the ways in which our interdisciplinary research has revealed novel in-sights into the relationship between the pandas and humans in the coupled human and natural system of Wolong Nature Reserve. We brought to light fac-tors that have contributed to long-term coexistence between people and pandas. These factors include the panda’s natural avoidance of direct interactions with people, plant-based diet (so they do not prey on livestock), and relatively small space require-ments (overlapping home ranges of 2.7–6 km2). We also described how the reserve’s zoning regulations

areas as targets for zoning revisions toward a higher level of protection (Figure 4.7; Hull et al., 2011). In addition, clearer guidelines should be put in place by the central government dictating rules about how the government may revise the zoning scheme over time as management needs change. For exam-ple, recent revisions to Wolong’s zoning scheme allowed for tourism development in a previously protected region. This change could be harmful to pandas because this area overlaps with a key part of the panda distribution area (Hull et al., 2011). In addition, managers should recognize that zoning does not do as well at managing human activities such as livestock grazing and should be combined with other policies that promote coexistence. Pro-grams involving payments for ecosystem services, discussed at length in other chapters of this book (e.g., Chapters  5 and 13), provide good examples of ways to reward local people for their help with conservation. Such an approach is necessary and

Legend

Focal buffer zone

Focal experimental zone

Roads

Zones (2009)

Core

Buffer

ExperimentalA

D

E

C

BF

N

E

S

0 6 12 18 24Kilometers

W

A, B, C - Experimental zone areas of concernD, E, F - Buffer zone areas of concern

Figure 4.7 Proposed focal areas for zoning revisions in wolong Nature reserve for improved giant panda conservation. Zoning designations (core, buffer, and experimental) are presented along with focal experimental zones (areas of experimental zone that should be considered for conversion to buffer and/or core zone) and focal buffer zones (areas of buffer zone that should be considered for partial or full conversion to core zone). Both focal zones represent areas that support giant pandas and are also outside existing human establishments. letters represent focal experimental (a–C) and buffer (d–f) zones of particular importance that are recommended for revision to better protect the panda population. reprinted with permission from elsevier (originally printed in Hull et al., 2011).

58 Pa N d a S a N d P e o P l e

foster coexistence by encouraging spatial segrega-tion between pandas and people, with human de-velopment limited to specified experimental zones in the reserve. We then highlighted the mechanisms and consequences of competition between people and pandas via activities such as timber harvesting, fuelwood collection, and livestock grazing. Our research also demonstrates the effectiveness of ex-isting governmental policies and helped us to set forth recommendations for future policy making to promote coexistence between people and pan-das. Other examples include improving zoning re-gulations to protect a greater proportion of panda habitat and developing a comprehensive livestock policy to address ever-evolving grazing issues. The complex panda–human interactions we explored here are reminiscent of the same challenges faced with balancing wildlife conservation and human livelihoods in many other coupled systems around the globe. Such complexities require a renewed ef-fort toward analysis of wildlife–human relation-ships for better management of endangered wildlife and human well-being.

References

Bearer, S., Linderman, M., Huang, J., et al. (2008) Effects of fuelwood collection and timber harvesting on giant panda habitat use. Biological Conservation, 141, 385–93.

Berger, K.M. (2006) Carnivore–livestock conflicts: effects of subsidized predator control and economic correl-ates on the sheep industry. Conservation Biology, 20, 751–61.

Carter, N.H., Shrestha, B.K., Karki, J.B., et  al. (2012) Co-existence between wildlife and humans at fine spatial scales. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 15360–65.

Carter, N.H., Viña, A., Hull, V., et al. (2014) Coupled hu-man and natural systems approach to wildlife research and conservation. Ecology and Society, 19, 43.

Corlett, R.T. (2007) The impact of hunting on the mam-malian fauna of tropical Asian forests. Biotropica, 39, 292–303.

Distefano, E. (2005) Human–wildlife conflict worldwide: collection of case studies, analysis of management strat-egies and good practices. SARD. Initiative Report, FAO, Rome, Italy.

Fellowes, J., Lau, M., Chan, B., et al. (2004) Nature reserves in South China: Observations on their role and prob-lems in conserving biodiversity. In Y. Xie, S. Wang, and

P. Schei, eds, China’s Protected Areas, pp. 341–55. Tsing-hua University Press, Beijing, China.

Garshelis, D.L. (2004) Variation in ursid life histories: is there an outlier? In D. Lindburg and K. Baragona, eds, Giant Pandas: Biology and Conservation, pp. 53–73. Uni-versity of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Gittleman, J.L. (2001) Carnivore Conservation (vol. 5). Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Hu, J. (2001) Research on the Giant Panda. Shanghai Science and Education Publishing House, Shanghai, China (in Chinese).

Hull, V. (2014) Giant Panda Behavior across a Coupled Human and Natural System. Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.

Hull, V., Roloff, G., Zhang, J., et al. (2014a) A synthesis of giant panda habitat selection. Ursus, 25, 148–62.

Hull, V., Xu, W., Liu, W., et al. (2011) Evaluating the effi-cacy of zoning designations for protected area manage-ment. Biological Conservation, 144, 3028–37.

Hull, V., Zhang, J., Zhou, S., et al. (2014b) Impact of live-stock on giant pandas and their habitat. Journal for Na-ture Conservation, 22, 256–64.

Hull, V., Zhang, J., Zhou, S., et  al. (2015) Space use by endangered giant pandas. Journal of Mammalogy, 96, 230–36.

Lau, M.W.-N., Fellowes, J.R., and Chan, B.P.L. (2010) Car-nivores (Mammalia: Carnivora) in South China: a status review with notes on the commercial trade. Mammal Re-view, 40, 247–92.

Liu, J., Li, S., Ouyang, Z., et al. (2008) Ecological and so-cioeconomic effects of China’s policies for ecosystem services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 9477–82.

Liu, J., Linderman, M., Ouyang, Z., et al. (2001) Ecological degradation in protected areas: the case of Wolong Na-ture Reserve for giant pandas. Science, 292, 98–101.

Liu, J., Ouyang, Z., Taylor, W.W., et al. (1999) A framework for evaluating the effects of human factors on wildlife habitat: the case of giant pandas. Conservation Biology, 13, 1360–70.

Liu, X. and Li, J. (2008) Scientific solutions for the function-al zoning of nature reserves in China. Ecological Model-ling, 215, 237–46.

Madden, F. (2004) Creating coexistence between humans and wildlife: global perspectives on local efforts to ad-dress human–wildlife conflict. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 9, 247–57.

Menard, C., Duncan, P., Fleurance, G., et al. (2002) Com-parative foraging and nutrition of horses and cattle in European wetlands. Journal of Applied Ecology, 39, 120–33.

Morzillo, A.T., De Beurs, K.M., and Martin-Mikle, C.J. (2014) A conceptual framework to evaluate human–wildlife

Pa N d a S – P e o P l e C o e X i S t e N C e a N d   C o m P e t i t i o N 59

old-growth Abies–Betula forests in southwestern China: a 12-year study. Forest Ecology and Management, 200, 347–60.

Taylor, A.H. and Qin, Z. (1987) Culm dynamics and dry matter production of bamboos in the Wolong and Tangjiahe giant panda reserves, Sichuan, China. Journal of Applied Ecology, 24, 419–33.

Tilson, R., Defu, H., Muntifering, J., and Nyhus, P.J. (2004) Dramatic decline of wild South China tigers Panthera tigris amoyensis: field survey of priority tiger reserves. Oryx, 38, 40–47.

Treves, A. and Karanth, K.U. (2003) Human–carnivore conflict and perspectives on carnivore management worldwide. Conservation Biology, 17, 1491–99.

Viña, A., Chen, X.D., McConnell, W.J., et al. (2011) Effects of natural disasters on conservation policies: the case of the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake, China. Ambio, 40, 274–84.

Viña, A., Tuanmu, M.-N., Xu, W., et al. (2010) Range-wide analysis of wildlife habitat: implications for conserva-tion. Biological Conservation, 143, 1960–69.

Wei, F., Yang, G., Hu, J., and Stringham, S. (2004) Balan-cing panda and human needs for bamboo shoots in Ma-bian Nature Reserve, China: predictions from a logistic-like model. In D. Lindburg and K. Baragona, eds, Giant Pandas: Biology and Conservation, pp. 201–09. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Wolong Nature Reserve (2008) Wolong Nature Reserve An-nual Agricultural Report, 2008.

Woodroffe, R., Thirgood, S., and Rabinowitz, A. (2005) People and Wildlife, Conflict or Coexistence? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Yong, Y., Liu, X., Wang, T., et al. (2004) Giant panda migra-tion and habitat utilization in Foping Nature Reserve, China. In D. Lindburg and K. Baragona, eds, Giant Pan-das: Biology and Conservation, pp. 159–69. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Zhang, Z., Sheppard, J.K., Swaisgood, R.R., et  al. (2014) Ecological scale and seasonal heterogeneity in the spatial behaviors of giant pandas. Integrative Zoology, 9, 46–60.

Zhang, Z., Swaisgood, R.R., Wu, H., et al. (2007) Factors predicting den use by maternal giant pandas. The Jour-nal of Wildlife Management, 71, 2694–98.

interactions within coupled human and natural systems. Ecology and Society, 19, 44.

Ng, J.W., Nielson, C., and St Clair, C.C. (2008) Landscape and traffic factors influencing deer–vehicle collisions in an urban environment. Human–Wildlife Interactions, Pa-per 79. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/hwi/79/.

Nie, Y., Swaisgood, R.R., Zhang, Z., et al. (2012) Giant pan-da scent-marking strategies in the wild: role of season, sex and marking surface. Animal Behaviour, 84, 39–44.

Nie, Y., Zhang, Z., Raubenheimer, D., et al. (2015) Obligate herbivory in an ancestrally carnivorous lineage: the gi-ant panda and bamboo from the perspective of nutri-tional geometry. Functional Ecology, 29, 26–34.

Pan, W., Lü, Z., Zhu, X.J., et al. (2001) A Chance for Last-ing Survival. Beijing University Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese).

Peng, J., Jiang, Z., and Hu, J. (2001) Status and conserva-tion of giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca): a review. Folia Zoologica, 50, 81–88.

Peterson, M.N., Birckhead, J.L., Leong, K., et  al. (2010) Rearticulating the myth of human–wildlife conflict. Conservation Letters, 3, 74–82.

Pimm, S.L. and Raven, P. (2000) Biodiversity: extinction by numbers. Nature, 403, 843–45.

Pomeroy, R., Parks, J., Pollnac, R., et al. (2007) Fish wars: conflict and collaboration in fisheries management in Southeast Asia. Marine Policy, 31, 645–56.

Schaller, G.B. (1994) The Last Panda. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

Schaller, G.B., Hu, J., Pan, W., and Zhu, J. (1985) The Gi-ant Pandas of Wolong. University of Chicago Press, Chi-cago, IL.

State Forestry Administration (2006) The Third National Survey Report on the Giant Panda in China. Science Pub-lishing House, Beijing, China (in Chinese).

State Forestry Administration of China (2015) The Fourth National Giant Panda Survey. http://www.forestry.gov.cn/main/4462/content-743596.html (in Chinese).

Swaisgood, R.R., Lindburg, D.G., and Zhou, X.P. (1999) Giant pandas discriminate individual differences in conspecific scent. Animal Behaviour, 57, 1045–53.

Taylor, A.H., Huang, J., and Zhou, S. (2004) Canopy tree development and undergrowth bamboo dynamics in