Community involvement in the mass capture of Red-billed Queleas Quelea quelea adjacent to protected areas: the case of Chemba District, Dodoma, Tanzania

The mass capture and utilisation of Red-billed Queleas Quelea quelea as a source of food is practiced in different African countries. The current study sought information on the trapping methods and techniques used by local communities in Chemba District, Tanzania, taking into account the respondents’ age, gender and occupation. It also captured the economic contributions and challenges associated with trapping queleas across the three study villages. Semi-structured questionnaires, focus group discussions and direct observations were used. Male respondents and adult farmers were found to participate most in quelea trapping. Queleas were used both as a source of food and income. Both a modern method (i.e. mist-netting) and traditional local trapping methods (e.g. grass basket traps and sticky tree resin) were reported to be used, but the combination of the modern and local methods was the most effective. Reported challenges included poor trapping techniques, scarcity of markets, and chemical spraying as a quelea control measure. Based on the results, we recommend detailed research on improving mass-trapping techniques and developing a marketing strategy to promote sales of the captured birds. As a long-term measure, these will contribute to improve both the livelihoods of local people and the ecological health of the communities.

Red-billed Queleas are mostly viewed as a pest rather than as a resource (Mtobesya 2012).As a pest, they threaten the livelihoods of small grain farmers in most African countries, including Tanzania (Cheke et al. 2013;Cheke and El Hady Sidatt 2019).This results in large numbers of birds being killed every year using chemicals as a pest control measure (Cheke and El Hady Sidatt 2019).It is believed that the chemical method has some secondary effects on ecological integrity because it affects other animals, such as lizards, mammals and insects, as well as other birds (Mtobesya 2012;Cheke et al. 2013), and thus alternative intervention measures such as mass capture are highly recommended (Mullié 2000;Elliott et al. 2014).
Humans have always captured wild birds and their eggs for food, medicine and other economic activities, across the world (e.g.Berkes et al. 1994;Fernandes-Ferreira et al. 2012;Benítez-López et al. 2017) and in Africa (Hitchcock et al. 1996;Williams et al. 2014;Atuo et al. 2015;Whytock et al. 2018).Mass capture of queleas is crucial for villagers, with over 8 million birds captured in the Awashi River region of Ethiopia (Mulliè 2000), and over 1.2 million birds captured in Chad in 1 week alone (Mulliè 2000;Cheke 2011;Cheke et al. 2013).The mass captures, sales and utilisation of birds can help compensate for losses that result from the destruction of crops.It was reported that more than 40% of crop losses were compensated by income generated from selling birds in Chad and Cameroon (Mulliè 2000;Aiyeloja and Adedeji 2015).Besides the economic benefits, queleas are known as a source of protein and other nutrients for human health, comparable to meat and fish (Ngume et al. 2022); queleas can also be mixed with other foods, like rice, potatoes and bananas, to supplement infant foods (Ngume et al. 2022;Lyeme and Katalambula 2023).Thus, mass capture of queleas seems to maximise benefits as a food resource for people while being a pest control method with minimal effects on the environment; hence, research in this area should be prioritised.
Here, we report on a study conducted in Chemba District of the Dodoma Region of Tanzania, located at approximately 4°00-5 o 45′ S, 35 o 00-36 o 30′ E. The district harbours the largest Red-billed Quelea population in the country, which has a heavy impact on agriculture.Regardless of the negative effects of chemical spraying for the environment, the government works tirelessly to control queleas by spraying chemicals (Queletox®) from aircraft, killing up to 185 million birds each year in Tanzania (Mtobesya 2012).However, local people have always harvested the birds for food and business (Ngume et al. 2022).Some previous research has been done in Chemba District regarding the trapping methods (Mtobesya 2012) and the attitudes of communities towards queleas (Manyama 2013).In this study we look into details on the trapping methods used and the communities' involvement across gender, age and occupations, and assess the economic benefits resulting from trapping queleas.
The main socioeconomic activities of the communities in Chemba District include agro-pastoralism, charcoal production and local businesses (United Republic of Tanzania 2013).The district is adjacent to two protected areas, the Swagaswaga Game Reserve (SGR) and Mkungunero Game Reserve (MGR), believed to be the core roosting and nesting sites for queleas.This research focused on three villages: Isini (near the SGR), Cheku (on the birds' migration route) and Dalai (near the MGR).
Primary data collection consisted of semi-structured questionnaires given to 116 respondents (Supplementary Figure S1).As recommended by Bailey (1994), at least 5% of households per village were randomly selected for interviews; this involved 40, 36 and 40 households in Cheku, Dalai and Isini, respectively.The respondents were aged 18 years or older and had experience with queleas in the study area.Village leaders introduced the researchers and asked for the community's consent before the survey.The study aimed to understand the awareness about queleas in the villages, peoples' participation in trapping, the trapping methods used, and economic gains derived from the activity.A focus group discussion with 10 participants was conducted to confirm the existence of queleas, the trapping methods, and the different groups involved in trapping.Additionally, field observations were conducted for 6 days to collect data on the queleas, trapping methods, individuals involved, and the business of selling queleas.The study analysed the respondents' occupations (Supplementary Figure S2) and involvement in quelea trapping using multiple response and cross-tabulation methods.Nonparametric tests were used to compare the respondents' gender, age distribution and economic gains between the different trapping methods.
Farming was the most common occupation (59%) in the villages, followed by livestock-keeping and farming (36%).Other activities had little expression, with 2% self-employed people and business owners, and 1% masons.Participation in trapping queleas was high across the three study villages, with 76% of the respondents involved in this activity (Table 1).Dalai (86.8%) had the highest level of involvement, followed by Isini (78.6%) and Cheku (59.5%).Most of the people (90%) involved in trapping queleas were farmers and livestock-keepers who captured queleas as a means for crop protection and food.Older people, with an average age of 53 years, were much more involved in trapping queleas than younger people, because they tend to stay in the villages and so have more time for this activity.Gender also played a significant role in quelea trapping, with 98% of quelea harvesters being male.This is attributable to local cultural norms that consider trapping birds, and hunting in general, an activity restricted to men.This agrees with other studies that have reported males as more highly involved not only in bird catching but also in bird watching (Janeczko et al. 2021;Randler 2021).
Both modern and local traditional methods were used to capture queleas, with a combination of the two being the preferred choice across the study villages (Figure 1).The modern method to catch birds utilises mist-nets (Supplementary Figure S3), while the local methods included traditional basket traps called matundu (Supplementary Figure S4) made from African star grass Cynodon nlemfuensis and ulimbo, which is a sticky resin from the tree Bursera simaruba.The use of these methods was similar in the three villages, except in that Cheku was the only village were some trappers exclusively used mist-nets (Figure 1).The most popular method was matundu traps (50%), followed by mist-netting (46%), with the use of ulimbo being rare (4%).
Older respondents aged 45-65 years preferred local methods, whereas the adult group aged 35-55 years combined the modern and local methods.The youth group aged <30 years preferred the use of mist-nets (Figure 2) as they know how to deploy them and view it as a modern technology.The use of mist-nets and ulimbo in trapping queleas varied significantly across age groups in the study villages (Kruskal-Wallis: H (26) = 43.593,p = 0.017 and H (26) = 53.00,p = 0.01, respectively), whereas the use of matundu did not.During the dry season trappers preferred the use of traditional basket traps, with the traps placed above stagnant waters such as swamps and ponds.In the wet season the use of mist-nets was preferred.Mist-nets performed best in mass capture of queleas in other studies (Mtobesya 2012;Elliott et al. 2014).
Capture success varied significantly with the trapping method used (Kruskal-Wallis: H (2) = 7.878, p = 0.019).The combination of modern and local methods was reported to perform best, followed by the modern method and local methods, with an average of 2 000, 1 000 and 500 captured queleas per person per day, respectively.The number of queleas captured varied significantly between villages, with Isini village being the most successful and Cheku the least (Kruskal-Wallis: H (2) = 8.011, p = 0.018 and H (2) = 14.424, p = 0.001, for modern method and local methods, respectively).The total income obtained by the respondents from selling queleas ranged from Tanzanian shillings (TZS) 1 000 (= 0.4 USD) to 200 000 (= 87 USD) per person per day.Across the study villages, Isini was the leader in terms of accumulating income (Figure 3).The focus group discussion confirmed by 100% that the business of selling queleas generates income and that some people depend on it as their livelihood.Captured, uncooked queleas were sold to business people at Kellema Market in Chemba District along the Dodoma-Arusha Road.The money obtained from this business was reported as insufficient, since the sale price is low in comparison to the hunting effort.This may explain why the majority of the trappers hunted birds for their own consumption and not for selling.This is consistent with earlier findings (Mtobesya 2012;Flora et al. 2014), though those studies did not provide details on the economic gains across households and trapping methods.
Across the study villages, 86% of the respondents reported poor trapping techniques as the major challenge in trapping queleas.This was agreed upon by 98% of the respondents of the focus group discussion.The mist-nets were said to be expensive, costing approximately 100 000 TZS (45.5 USD) for 10 m.Additionally, the use of mist-nets was reported to be intensive and required the person to spend all day in the bush and on farms.The respondents from focused group discussions agreed by 90%, noting that "the quelea trappers can even go a week without showering as they spend all the day time in the bush."As part of the trapping process, a trapper also needed to whistle, mimicking the voice of starling birds warning the queleas of danger from predators, causing them flee to a lower elevation to hide, whereby the queleas would become trapped in the net during that process.This capture technique requires specific skills and typically involves the availability of an energetic young man to do it.To address this limitation, Mtobesya (2012) assessed the effectiveness of several local traps and tried to modify some to improve capture efficiency; that author also adapted and tested the effectiveness of one type of trap called the Tunisian trap, used successfully in Tunisia as well as in the United States; however, neither the modified local traps or the Tunisian trap improved capture efficiency (Mtobesya 2012).
Opportunities for selling queleas have been reported as a further limitation to capture activities in communities.Therefore, efforts need to be made to market queleas throughout the country, promoting them as a source of food and income.Chemical spraying will obviously decrease the quelea population and, hence, the numbers  that can be captured for sale.Studies have revealed the effects of using different chemicals in controlling queleas not only on other non-target organisms but also on the soil (Cheke et al. 2013;Elliott et al. 2014;Cheke and El Hady Sidatt 2019).Contrary to a study by Flora et al. (2014), who reported that local communities in Kondoa District did not have negative attitudes towards chemical spraying, our study found that the same communities have acquired a negative attitude towards controlling queleas with chemicals.According to 70% of respondents, chemical spraying contributes to the decline of quelea populations and has an impact on other bird species, reptiles and small mammals.We recommend: (i) detailed studies on the nutrient contents of Red-billed Queleas and suitability of the birds as a source of human nutrition; (ii) improvement of trapping methods that can be easily adopted by different groups of people; and (iii) marketing strategies to communities to create awareness of the potential of queleas as a source of food and economic income.As a long-term measure, these will contribute not only to improve the livelihoods of the communities but also to control of an agricultural pest without the use of chemicals which inevitably negatively affect many other species and the integrity of ecosystems.

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: Reported methods used for trapping Red-billed Queleas Quelea quelea across three villages in Chemba District, Tanzania

Figure 2 :Figure 3 :
Figure 2: Method used for trapping Red-billed Queleas Quelea quelea relative to the trapper's age (a) and across the three study villages (b) in Chemba District, Tanzania

Table 1 :
Summary of trapping of Red-billed Queleas Quelea quelea across three villages in Chemba District, Tanzania, in relation to respondents' occupation and proportion of their involvement