Provide better equipment (e.g. guns) to anti-poaching ranger patrols

Overall effectiveness category Likely to be beneficial
Number of studies: 3
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

50%
Certainty

40%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

If anti-poaching rangers are provided with better equipment (e.g. guns, or technical equipment, such as GPS, compass, hand-held data recording devices, binoculars, cameras, rain gear, etc.), they may be more effective at reducing hunting in the areas they patrol.

The patrolling of areas by anti-poaching teams to reduce hunting is discussed separately under ‘Conduct regular anti-poaching patrols’. The providing of training to anti-poaching patrols and the regular removal of ground snares by snare-removal teams that may form part of anti-poaching teams is discussed under ‘Provide training to anti-poaching ranger patrols’ and ‘Regularly de-activate/remove ground snares’. The use of monitoring surveillance strategies and/or monitoring data to improve effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement patrols is discussed under ‘Implement monitoring surveillance strategies (e.g. SMART) or use monitoring data to improve effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement patrols’.

Study locations

Key messages

One before-and-after study in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda found that gorilla populations increased after anti-poaching guard were provided with better equipment, alongside other interventions.
One study in Uganda found that no gorillas were killed for 21 months after game guards were provided with better equipment, alongside other interventions.
One before-and-after study in Rwanda found that the number of immature gorillas increased and the number of snares decreased after anti-poaching patrols were supplied with better equipment, alongside other interventions.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A before-and-after trial in 1984-1987 in tropical montane forest in the Virunga ecosystem in Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that after anti-poaching guards were provided with better equipment that allowed them to increase patrol frequency and effectiveness, alongside other interventions, mountain gorilla Gorilla beringei beringei numbers increased from 242 to 279 individuals (15% increase) from 1981-1986. In addition, average group size increased from 8.5 to 9.2 individuals (17% increase) and immature proportion increased from 39.7 to 48.1% (8% increase) over the same time period. Regular total counts of this population were conducted since 1973 by research staff. Anti-poaching guards regularly removed ground snares and conducted anti-poaching patrols. In 1979, a multi-organisation funded conservation project was initiated. In 1985, a gorilla viewing tourism programme was started during which three gorilla groups were habituated for tourist viewing. The study does not distinguish between the effects of the different interventions mentioned above.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Aveling R. & Aveling C. (1987) Report from the Zaire Gorilla Conservation Project. Primate Conservation, 8, 162-164.
A review on the status of mountain gorillas Gorilla beringei beringei in 1972-1989 in tropical montane forest in Eastern Virungas Conservation Area, Uganda found that no gorillas were killed in 1989-1990 after the game guard force was provided with better equipment alongside other interventions. The number of game guards was increased from three to 13 men, who were trained and supervised by researchers. In January 1989 a permanent research project was established. Human settlers were relocated from an area (3 km² in size) that represented the most important gorilla habitat inside the Gorilla Game Reserve within the Eastern Virungas Conservation Area. The study does not distinguish between the effects of the different interventions mentioned above
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Butynski T.M., Werikhe S.E. & Kalina J. (1990) Status, distribution and conservation of the mountain gorilla in the Gorilla Game Reserve, Uganda. Primate Conservation, 11, 31-41.
A before-and-after trial and site comparison in 1976-1988 in tropical forest of the Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda found that the number of immature mountain gorillas Gorilla beringei beringei on the Rwandan side of the park increased and snares decreased after the implementation of regular anti-poaching patrols, alongside other interventions. The number of immature individuals increased by 22% on the Rwandan side of the park, but declined by 30% on the side of the park in the other two countries. However, no statistical tests were carried out to determine whether these differences were significant. Patrols were initiated in 1979, but the study did not report on further details relating to the anti-poaching methods used. Funds provided by a tourist programme enabled the training, equipping and management of the anti-poaching patrols. In 1976, all cattle were removed from the park in Rwanda. A conservation education programme was implemented, but no further details were reported in the study. The study does not distinguish between the effects of the different interventions mentioned above.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Harcourt A.H. (2001) The benefits of mountain gorilla tourism. Gorilla Journal, 22, 36-37.

Please cite as:

Junker, J., Kühl, H.S., Orth, L., Smith, R.K., Petrovan, S.O. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Primate Conservation. Pages 431-482 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Primate Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Implement local no-hunting community policies/traditional hunting ban Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	5	Synopsis Link
Implement monitoring surveillance strategies (e.g. SMART) or use monitoring data to improve effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement patrols Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Regularly de-activate/remove ground snares Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	3	Synopsis Link