An Integrated Approach to Tackling Wildlife Crime: Impact and Lessons Learned From Reforming Hunters to Reduce Snaring in a Flagship Protected Area in Sumatra, Indonesia.

The intervention caused the problem to decline. In particular, the strategy of combining focused patrolling and alternative livelihood measures led to a significant reduction in illegal hunting activities.

The intervention worked by focusing on hunters operating in the Way Kambas National Park (WKNP), specifically five key hunters, including three initiators and two followers, who were identified as influential figures within the hunting community. The intervention worked on a number of levels:

Increase Risks - By actively patrolling and removing snares in known hotspots, the intervention worked to disrupt the profitability of illegal hunting by increasing the risk of detection and reducing the success rate of snare traps.

Reduce Rewards - The focused patrolling also worked to deter hunters by increasing their cost through the loss of snares and decreased likelihood of successful hunting leading to lower financial rewards.

Reduce Provocations - This intervention sought to shift hunters away from illegal activities by providing them with a legal and sustainable source of income through duck farming. The goal was to address the economic motivation behind hunting by offering a viable alternative that meets their livelihood needs.

Remove Excuses - The intervention worked by increasing the awareness and understanding of wildlife protection laws and the consequences of illegal hunting. It also leverages social influence by involving reformed hunters in these campaigns, thereby strengthening the message and promoting behavioral change. Moreover, by showcasing the successful transition of reformed hunters, the intervention sought to inspire others to pursue legal livelihoods. The researchers claim that the awareness-raising events, combined with the influence of reformed hunters, contributed to a reduction in snaring activities, even in control resorts where alternative livelihoods were not provided.

While attributing the decline solely to this intervention is challenging due to the concurrent implementation of other measures, the observed "snowball effect" supports the intended mechanism of social influence and increased awareness.

A detailed context analysis was conducted before the intervention. Patrol data from 2016-2020 revealed that snaring activity was concentrated in three resorts (Margahayu, Susukan Baru, and Rawa Bunder), with Margahayu identified as the focal area due to its chronic snaring problem. In addition, interviews with hunters revealed economic motivations behind the hunting, which informed the design of the alternative livelihood intervention. The case study describes several contextual factors that influenced the intervention's success as well as some that represented challenges. For instance, positive factors identified included the trust-building efforts with key hunters, the strong leadership of village heads, and community participation all positively influenced the mechanisms. Additionally, a detailed understanding of hunters economic needs helped tailor the alternative livelihood intervention. Identified challenges included the difficulty in sustaining the engagement of reformed hunters, and some hunters returning to illegal activities after a reduction in monitoring. Economic fluctuations and personal financial instability of hunters also complicated the long-term success of alternative livelihoods. The analysis also identified potential difficulties in replicating this intervention in other contexts. One of the key challenges discussed was the importance of building trust with hunters and community leaders. The success of the intervention depended heavily on the willingness of the targeted hunters to cooperate, and the absence of punitive measures against them. It is suggested that in other contexts where trust or cooperation is harder to establish, or where law enforcement takes a more punitive approach, these interventions might not be as successful.

The intervention adopted a systematic approach to problem-solving, involving data collection, analysis, targeted interventions, and adaptive management. This framework allowed for evidence-based decision-making and continuous improvement. The project employed dedicated analysts who received training and mentoring in problem-solving techniques. The intervention also involved close collaboration with various stakeholders including: Local Community: Engaged community leaders and the head of Labuhan Ratu VI village to facilitate the alternative livelihood intervention. Law Enforcement: Partnered with Labuhan Ratu Police and the military for awareness-raising events on wildlife protection laws. Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS): Played a key role in data collection, analysis, and implementation of interventions. Way Kambas National Park Office: Collaborated on all aspects of the project, including data collection, patrol efforts, and community engagement. Several key challenges to implementation were also identified, including: Maintaining Consistent Patrol Efforts: Shifting priorities, such as forest fires, sometimes diverted patrol efforts from snaring hotspots. To mitigate this, the project team implemented a strategic approach to patrolling, focusing on key areas and adjusting patrol schedules based on available resources. Sustaining Engagement with Hunters: The fluctuating financial needs of hunters posed a challenge to maintaining their long-term commitment to alternative livelihoods. The project team responded by providing continued support, monitoring, and encouragement, even when some individuals relapsed into snaring. They recognized the need for ongoing engagement and flexibility to cater to individual circumstances. Scaling up Interventions: While the project achieved significant reductions in snaring within the targeted areas, hunting continued in other parts of the park. The sources acknowledge the need to scale up the interventions to address the wider problem of illegal hunting in WKNP. The success of the pilot project provided valuable lessons and a framework for expanding efforts to other areas.

The cost of purchasing livestock (ducklings) for the alternative livelihood program was approximately Rp. 4,600,000 (USD $318.60) per hunter. The cost of patrols was reported to be at least Rp 90,000,000 (USD $5,700) annually. The case study also pointed out that the alternative livelihood intervention (duck farming) was more cost-effective compared to continuous patrols. While patrols were essential for forest monitoring, the one-time investment in duck farming was seen as a lower-cost and effective way to reduce hunting activities. For example, the duck farming revenue generated by the hunters exceeded the initial investment, although it was not enough to fully replace hunting income. The analysis indicated that a combination of patrols and alternative livelihood programs provided a more sustainable solution at a lower cost.