Indigenous tracking mapped a 22,000-km² wildlife corridor that conventional surveys struggle to cover
WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS
Researchers combined biannual track surveys by Indigenous certified trackers with a density-estimation framework across roughly 22,000 km² over three years. The team analyzed 22,793 tracks from 13 large-herbivore and carnivore species collected along 6,222 km of transects. Some herbivores declined over the study period while carnivore densities showed no detected change. Cattleposts were negatively associated with most species; burned areas, vegetation and distance to mineral pans had species-specific associations. Predictive maps identified higher-density areas and potential movement pathways away from concentrated human activity.
WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ
The important method signal is that monitoring can be built around knowledge already adapted to the landscape. In sandy systems where tracks are persistent and expert identification is available, Indigenous tracking can generate spatially extensive wildlife information at a scale that would be costly to reproduce with cameras or captures alone. The land-use result also keeps the corridor problem concrete: multiuse land can remain functional for wildlife while becoming less permeable around sedentary livestock infrastructure.
CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY
Track-density estimators depend on assumptions about track accumulation, animal movement, detectability and correct identification; they are not direct censuses. Associations with cattleposts, fire, vegetation and pans are observational rather than experimental. The approach also depends on suitable substrate and highly skilled trackers, so the exact method is not automatically transferable to every landscape.
SOURCE
Conservation Biology — primary study
View original evidence ↗
Over three years in Botswana’s Kalahari, certified trackers logged 22,793 tracks across 6,222 km; cattleposts were negatively associated with most of 13 monitored species, while burned areas produced mixed responses.
Read the Wild Lands assessment →