Agricultural Economics

Permanent URI for this community

http://hdl.handle.net/11660/90

Browse

Browsing Agricultural Economics by Advisor "De Waal, H. O."

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The cost of predation on small livestock in South Africa by medium-sized predators
    (University of the Free State, 2010-11-30) Van Niekerk, Hermias Nieuwoudt; Taljaard, P. R; De Waal, H. O.; Grové, B.
    Farmers have been protecting their livestock for centuries by fencing and kraaling to prevent the risk of losses due to predators. The black-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas) and the caracal (Caracal caracal) are two important medium-sized predator species among the South African wildlife, but they have a negative impact on the livestock industry in South Africa, especially among sheep and goats. A small number of studies have been done to estimate losses due to predators. Local producer organisations estimated a loss of 8% of small livestock per year. However, no countrywide study has been done to quantify the monetary impact of predation on the livestock industry. Predation losses are not the only direct economic losses because there are also additional direct and indirect costs involved. The primary objective of this study was to quantify the economic losses due to predation on small livestock and further to analyse the effect of various managerial aspects on the occurrence and level of predation on small livestock farms. The five major small livestock producing provinces (Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, Free State, Western Cape and Mpumalanga) were used to collect primary data on predation. Telephonic interviews were used to collect data from 1 424 farmers in the five major small livestock producing provinces. The questionnaire included questions on farm name, location and size, flock size, topography, surrounding land uses, livestock losses due to predators, predator control and various managerial aspects. The majority of losses in these five provinces were small livestock younger than one month, where the black-backed jackal was responsible for the majority of the predation. Losses due to caracal were not as high compared with black-backed jackal. This is mainly ascribed to lower population levels of caracals and also that these damage-causing animals are not found in every region within a province. Losses due to caracal were associated with lambs or kids older than a month, as well as older small livestock. Predation losses due to predators was estimated at R 1 390 453 062 when extrapolating predation losses for the five provinces to the rest of South Africa. The Northern Cape Province reported the highest predation losses, namely R 540 847 496. The reported predation losses for the other four provinces were R 412 810 143 for the EC province, R 247 141 016 for the FS province, R 84 673 440 for the MP province and R 104 980 967 for the WC province. The physical monetary value attached to predation in this study was only the direct cost of predation and do not include indirect cost of controlling damage-causing animals. The monetary losses as presented previously were based on biological information provided by respondents for the five major small livestock producing provinces. For example in the NC province 426 farmers were surveyed, representing 6.9% of commercial farmers in the province. These farmers were farming on 3 290 790 ha and lost on average 6.14% of their total small livestock and 13% of production animals (lambs between 0 – 6 months). The majority of losses were associated with predation by the black-backed jackal (65%) and to a lesser extent predation by the caracal (30%). Other losses experienced on farms were attributed to stock theft (3%) and vagrant dogs (1%). There are a number of variables affecting predation in small livestock producing areas in South Africa. These variables differ between provinces according to the main agricultural practices in the area and the management practices used. It was hypothesised that the variables affecting the occurrence of predation and the variables that affected the level of predation was not the same, therefore, it was necessary to use the Probit and Truncated regression models. It was assumed that factors affecting the occurrence of predation are usually associated with management aspects and normally will be negatively correlated with predation losses. Variables affecting the level of predation can be seen as factors reducing the level of predation and these factors will usually include non-lethal and lethal control methods. The non-lethal control methods usually do not stop predation, but will reduce the level of predation on a farm. However, when success is associated with a certain control method, this variable will be significant in effecting the occurrence of predation on a farm and at a specific point in time. The information collected in this study showed that predation is a serious problem for the South African small livestock sector and there is also no indication that the level of predation is decreasing. This study does not answer all questions on predation, but provides valuable information in understanding the magnitude or extent of predation and some of the factors influencing predation on farms. The information collected can be used to select, evaluate and focus intensively on smaller areas in their efforts to manage predation and develop strategies to reduce the impact.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The economic cost of large stock predation in the North West province of South Africa
    (University of the Free State, 2014-07) Badenhorst, Coenraad Geldenhuys; Van Niekerk, H. N.; Strydom, D. B.; Jordaan, H.; De Waal, H. O.
    Predation is a problem for livestock farmers in many parts of the world and increasing losses are ascribed to predation. The black-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas) and caracal (Caracal caracal) are two important medium size predator species among South African wildlife, but they have a negative impact on the livestock industry in South Africa, especially on small livestock such as sheep and goats. These two predators and also brown hyaena (Parahyaena brunnea), cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus), dogs (Canis familiaris) and leopard (Panthera pardus) are responsible for losses of small and large livestock in several provinces. A number of studies have focused on the cost of predation on small livestock, specifically the direct cost of predation, and only a few studies have looked at the different methods to help farmers to minimise or eliminate losses due to predation. However, no study has quantified the direct as well as the indirect cost of predation on cattle in South Africa. The study focussed on predation losses of cattle in South Africa. A sample of 1 500 cattle farmers was divided between provinces in relation to the number of cattle in provinces as percentage of the national cattle herd. The Western Cape and Gauteng did not want to participate in the study; the structured questionnaire was used to conduct a survey by telephone with the remaining sample size of 1 344 cattle farmers in seven (7) provinces. For the purpose of this report (dissertation) only the North West province was explored in detail and the primary information for the six other provinces are included as appendices. Three main objectives were pursued, namely: to quantify the direct and indirect losses ascribed to predation; to determine the impact of predation on the large livestock industry in the North West province; to investigate the underlying structures in the predation prevention practices used by farmers in the North West province; to improve the understanding of the current behaviour of the farmers in preventing predation, and to investigate the factors that influence predation in the North West province, in order to identify prevention approaches that are associated with reduced predation. Such information may contribute to the identification of possible best management practices for predation prevention. The study (reported in the dissertation) was conducted in the four magisterial districts of the North West province namely: Bojanala Platinum District, Bophirima District, Ngaka Modiri Molema District and Southern District. The sample size of this study was 238 respondents who farmed commercially with a total of 122 780 head of cattle or 16% of the total number of cattle in the North West province. Telephonic interviews were used to collect data from the farmers. The structured questionnaire included questions on topics such socio-economic factors, managerial factors and the methods used to protect the livestock. The majority of the losses in the four magisterial districts of the North West province were caused by the black-backed jackal followed by the caracal. The percentage of losses due to the caracal is markedly lower than those caused by the black-backed jackal. The reason for the lower predation is not clear, but it is speculated that it may be a result of the smaller population of the caracal and the fact that caracal are solitary predators and do not hunt in groups. The direct cost of predation losses (cattle) in the North West province was estimated at ZAR67 776 800, when extrapolating predation losses on a provincial basis. The indirect cost of predation in the North West province was divided into a lethal cost of predation (ZAR7 455 333) and the non-lethal cost (ZAR9 087 653). Therefore, the total cost of predation in the North West province was estimated at ZAR84 319 786. This study showed that 37% of farmers in the North West province use lethal control methods and only 14% use non-lethal methods of control. The lethal preventing methods are divided into six types of methods that include: shooting predators at night with spotlights (15%), using specialist hunters (6%), foothold traps (1%), cage traps (8%), hunting with dogs (2%) and poison (5%). The non-lethal methods are: herdsmen (8%), electric fences (1%), jackal proof fences (<1%), kraaling (4%) and guarding dogs (1%). The list of methods available in the toolkit for farmers to manage predation on cattle is shorter than for sheep and goat farmers. Most appropriate methods available to farmers to control predation or mitigate the impact of predation (non-lethal and lethal) on cattle were used by respondents. However, none of these methods when used individually or when a few were used in combination, proved to be a one-for-all solution at the provincial level. At the district level there were indications that some methods were more effective in reducing the impact of predation. The information suggests that all the appropriate methods and equipment available must be incorporated in the local predation management approach and strategy. The data were used to investigate the underlying structures and also to identify the best management practices. The principal component regression (PCR) tools were used to analyse the data and deal with the problem of multi co-linearity. The Pairwise Granger Causality test was used to analyse the direction of causality. The study included 42 different explanatory variables that were divided into four groups namely: socio-economic factors, managerial factors, lethal control methods and non-lethal control methods. There were 11 significant variables in the PCR (Logit) and 22 significant variables in the PCR (Truncated). The causality tests showed that none of the Logit variables had a Granger cause, but there were two Tobit variables that had a Granger cause. These two lethal methods had a negative effect on the level of predation. These results were unexpected, but this effect may be because of inexperienced farmers who kill predators that do not cause problems thereby causing a “vacuum” effect of new predators moving in. The conclusions of Van Niekerk (2010) were confirmed, namely the factors that affect the occurrence of predation and those factors that affect the level of predation are not the same. This study does not provide definitive answers to predation, but it helps to understand predation better with a view to develop appropriate management solutions. The total direct and indirect cost of predation on cattle in the different provinces and South Africa was: Western Cape - NA; Northern Cape - ZAR19 943 079; Free State - ZAR117 600 433; Eastern Cape - ZAR4 827 237; KwaZulu-Natal - ZAR66 027 879; Mpumalanga - ZAR43 938 376; Limpopo - ZAR46 486 017; Gauteng - NA; North West - ZAR84 319 786; South Africa - ZAR383 142 807. In summary, the respondents in six (6) of the seven (7) provinces ascribed the majority of the predation losses on cattle to the black-backed jackal. The exception was the Limpopo province where the leopard was implicated to account for most of the predation losses on cattle. In some provinces the second most predation losses were ascribed either to the caracal, brown hyaena, leopard, dogs or cheetah. It should be noted that some uncertainty may exist in the ability of farmers to identify positively the specific predator responsible for the losses. In some cases secondary scavenging on cattle may also have been mistaken for predation. It clearly calls for increased efforts to increase the skills of farmers to identify the specific methods used by predators to catch and eat their prey. The widespread negative impact of predation losses to sheep, goats and cattle can hardly be ignored any longer. A third study by the UFS will soon commence to estimate the impact of predation on the wildlife ranching sector. Currently the approach to manage predation is fragmented and uncoordinated. The scale and impact of predation in South Africa calls for a focused and coordinated predation management and research programme to reduce (mitigate) the negative impact of predation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The economic cost of large stock predation in the North West Province of South Africa
    (University of the Free State, 2014-07) Badenhorst, Coenraad Geldenhuys; Van Niekerk, H. N.; De Waal, H. O.; Strydom, D.; Jordaan, H.
    Predation is a problem for livestock farmers in many parts of the world and increasing losses are ascribed to predation. The black-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas) and caracal (Caracal caracal) are two important medium size predator species among South African wildlife, but they have a negative impact on the livestock industry in South Africa, especially on small livestock such as sheep and goats. These two predators and also brown hyaena (Parahyaena brunnea), cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus), dogs (Canis familiaris) and leopard (Panthera pardus) are responsible for losses of small and large livestock in several provinces. A number of studies have focused on the cost of predation on small livestock, specifically the direct cost of predation, and only a few studies have looked at the different methods to help farmers to minimise or eliminate losses due to predation. However, no study has quantified the direct as well as the indirect cost of predation on cattle in South Africa. The study focussed on predation losses of cattle in South Africa. A sample of 1 500 cattle farmers was divided between provinces in relation to the number of cattle in provinces as percentage of the national cattle herd. The Western Cape and Gauteng did not want to participate in the study; the structured questionnaire was used to conduct a survey by telephone with the remaining sample size of 1 344 cattle farmers in seven (7) provinces. For the purpose of this report (dissertation) only the North West province was explored in detail and the primary information for the six other provinces are included as appendices. Three main objectives were pursued, namely: to quantify the direct and indirect losses ascribed to predation; to determine the impact of predation on the large livestock industry in the North West province; to investigate the underlying structures in the predation prevention practices used by farmers in the North West province; to improve the understanding of the current behaviour of the farmers in preventing predation, and to investigate the factors that influence predation in the North West province, in order to identify prevention approaches that are associated with reduced predation. Such information may contribute to the identification of possible best management practices for predation prevention. The study (reported in the dissertation) was conducted in the four magisterial districts of the North West province namely: Bojanala Platinum District, Bophirima District, Ngaka Modiri Molema District and Southern District. The sample size of this study was 238 respondents who farmed commercially with a total of 122 780 head of cattle or 16% of the total number of cattle in the North West province. Telephonic interviews were used to collect data from the farmers. The structured questionnaire included questions on topics such socio-economic factors, managerial factors and the methods used to protect the livestock. The majority of the losses in the four magisterial districts of the North West province were caused by the black-backed jackal followed by the caracal. The percentage of losses due to the caracal is markedly lower than those caused by the black-backed jackal. The reason for the lower predation is not clear, but it is speculated that it may be a result of the smaller population of the caracal and the fact that caracal are solitary predators and do not hunt in groups. The direct cost of predation losses (cattle) in the North West province was estimated at ZAR67 776 800, when extrapolating predation losses on a provincial basis. The indirect cost of predation in the North West province was divided into a lethal cost of predation (ZAR7 455 333) and the non-lethal cost (ZAR9 087 653). Therefore, the total cost of predation in the North West province was estimated at ZAR84 319 786. This study showed that 37% of farmers in the North West province use lethal control methods and only 14% use non-lethal methods of control. The lethal preventing methods are divided into six types of methods that include: shooting predators at night with spotlights (15%), using specialist hunters (6%), foothold traps (1%), cage traps (8%), hunting with dogs (2%) and poison (5%). The non-lethal methods are: herdsmen (8%), electric fences (1%), jackal proof fences (<1%), kraaling (4%) and guarding dogs (1%). The list of methods available in the toolkit for farmers to manage predation on cattle is shorter than for sheep and goat farmers. Most appropriate methods available to farmers to control predation or mitigate the impact of predation (non-lethal and lethal) on cattle were used by respondents. However, none of these methods when used individually or when a few were used in combination, proved to be a one-for-all solution at the provincial level. At the district level there were indications that some methods were more effective in reducing the impact of predation. The information suggests that all the appropriate methods and equipment available must be incorporated in the local predation management approach and strategy. The data were used to investigate the underlying structures and also to identify the best management practices. The principal component regression (PCR) tools were used to analyse the data and deal with the problem of multi co-linearity. The Pairwise Granger Causality test was used to analyse the direction of causality. The study included 42 different explanatory variables that were divided into four groups namely: socio-economic factors, managerial factors, lethal control methods and non-lethal control methods. There were 11 significant variables in the PCR (Logit) and 22 significant variables in the PCR (Truncated). The causality tests showed that none of the Logit variables had a Granger cause, but there were two Tobit variables that had a Granger cause. These two lethal methods had a negative effect on the level of predation. These results were unexpected, but this effect may be because of inexperienced farmers who kill predators that do not cause problems thereby causing a “vacuum” effect of new predators moving in. The conclusions of Van Niekerk (2010) were confirmed, namely the factors that affect the occurrence of predation and those factors that affect the level of predation are not the same. This study does not provide definitive answers to predation, but it helps to understand predation better with a view to develop appropriate management solutions. The total direct and indirect cost of predation on cattle in the different provinces and South Africa was: Western Cape - NA; Northern Cape - ZAR19 943 079; Free State - ZAR117 600 433; Eastern Cape - ZAR4 827 237; KwaZulu-Natal - ZAR66 027 879; Mpumalanga - ZAR43 938 376; Limpopo - ZAR46 486 017; Gauteng - NA; North West - ZAR84 319 786; South Africa - ZAR383 142 807. In summary, the respondents in six (6) of the seven (7) provinces ascribed the majority of the predation losses on cattle to the black-backed jackal. The exception was the Limpopo province where the leopard was implicated to account for most of the predation losses on cattle. In some provinces the second most predation losses were ascribed either to the caracal, brown hyaena, leopard, dogs or cheetah. It should be noted that some uncertainty may exist in the ability of farmers to identify positively the specific predator responsible for the losses. In some cases secondary scavenging on cattle may also have been mistaken for predation. It clearly calls for increased efforts to increase the skills of farmers to identify the specific methods used by predators to catch and eat their prey. The widespread negative impact of predation losses to sheep, goats and cattle can hardly be ignored any longer. A third study by the UFS will soon commence to estimate the impact of predation on the wildlife ranching sector. Currently the approach to manage predation is fragmented and uncoordinated. The scale and impact of predation in South Africa calls for a focused and coordinated predation management and research programme to reduce (mitigate) the negative impact of predation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The economic cost of large stock predation in the North West Province of South Africa
    (University of the Free State, 2014-07) Badenhorst, Coenraad Geldenhuys; Van Niekerk, H. N.; De Waal, H. O.; Strydom, D.; Jordaan, H.
    English: Predation is a problem for livestock farmers in many parts of the world and increasing losses are ascribed to predation. The black-backed jackal (Canis mesomelas) and caracal (Caracal caracal) are two important medium size predator species among South African wildlife, but they have a negative impact on the livestock industry in South Africa, especially on small livestock such as sheep and goats. These two predators and also brown hyaena (Parahyaena brunnea), cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus), dogs (Canis familiarise) and leopard (Panthera pardus) are responsible for losses of small and large livestock in several provinces. A number of studies have focused on the cost of predation on small livestock, specifically the direct cost of predation, and only a few studies have looked at the different methods to help farmers to minimize or eliminate losses due to predation. However, no study has quantified the direct as well as the indirect cost of predation on cattle in South Africa. The study focused on predation losses of cattle in South Africa. A sample of 1 500 cattle farmers was divided between provinces in relation to the number of cattle in provinces as percentage of the national cattle herd. The Western Cape and Gauteng did not want to participate in the study; the structured questionnaire was used to conduct a survey by telephone with the remaining sample size of 1 344 cattle farmers in seven (7) provinces. For the purpose of this report (dissertation) only the North West province was explored in detail and the primary information for the six other provinces are included as appendices. Three main objectives were pursued, namely: to quantify the direct and indirect losses ascribed to predation; to determine the impact of predation on the large livestock industry in the North West province; to investigate the underlying structures in the predation prevention practices used by farmers in the North West province; to improve the understanding of the current behaviour of the farmers in preventing predation, and to investigate the factors that influence predation in the North West province, in order to identify prevention approaches that are associated with reduced predation. Such information may contribute to the identification of possible best management practices for predation prevention. The study (reported in the dissertation) was conducted in the four magisterial districts of the North West province namely: Bojanala Platinum District, Bophirima District, Ngaka Modiri Molema District and Southern District. The sample size of this study was 238 respondents who farmed commercially with a total of 122 780 head of cattle or 16% of the total number of cattle in the North West province. Telephonic interviews were used to collect data from the farmers. The structured questionnaire included questions on topics such socio-economic factors, managerial factors and the methods used to protect the livestock. The majority of the losses in the four magisterial districts of the North West province were caused by the black-backed jackal followed by the caracal. The percentage of losses due to the caracal is markedly lower than those caused by the black-backed jackal. The reason for the lower predation is not clear, but it is speculated that it may be a result of the smaller population of the caracal and the fact that caracal are solitary predators and do not hunt in groups. The direct cost of predation losses (cattle) in the North West province was estimated at ZAR67 776 800, when extrapolating predation losses on a provincial basis. The indirect cost of predation in the North West province was divided into a lethal cost of predation (ZAR7 455 333) and the non-lethal cost (ZAR9 087 653). Therefore, the total cost of predation in the North West province was estimated at ZAR84 319 786. This study showed that 37% of farmers in the North West province use lethal control methods and only 14% use non-lethal methods of control. The lethal preventing methods are divided into six types of methods that include: shooting predators at night with spotlights (15%), using specialist hunters (6%), foothold traps (1%), cage traps (8%), hunting with dogs (2%) and poison (5%). The non-lethal methods are: herdsmen (8%), electric fences (1%), jackal proof fences (<1%), kraaling (4%) and guarding dogs (1%). The list of methods available in the toolkit for farmers to manage predation on cattle is shorter than for sheep and goat farmers. Most appropriate methods available to farmers to control predation or mitigate the impact of predation (non-lethal and lethal) on cattle were used by respondents. However, none of these methods when used individually or when a few were used in combination, proved to be a one-for-all solution at the provincial level. At the district level there were indications that some methods were more effective in reducing the impact of predation. The information suggests that all the appropriate methods and equipment available must be incorporated in the local predation management approach and strategy. The data were used to investigate the underlying structures and also to identify the best management practices. The principal component regression (PCR) tools were used to analyse the data and deal with the problem of multi co-linearity. The Pairwise Granger Causality test was used to analyse the direction of causality. The study included 42 different explanatory variables that were divided into four groups namely: socio-economic factors, managerial factors, lethal control methods and non-lethal control methods. There were 11 significant variables in the PCR (Logit) and 22 significant variables in the PCR (Truncated). The causality tests showed that none of the Logit variables had a Granger cause, but there were two Tobit variables that had a Granger cause. These two lethal methods had a negative effect on the level of predation. These results were unexpected, but this effect may be because of inexperienced farmers who kill predators that do not cause problems thereby causing a “vacuum” effect of new predators moving in. The conclusions of Van Niekerk (2010) were confirmed, namely the factors that affect the occurrence of predation and those factors that affect the level of predation are not the same. This study does not provide definitive answers to predation, but it helps to understand predation better with a view to develop appropriate management solutions. The total direct and indirect cost of predation on cattle in the different provinces and South Africa was: Western Cape - NA; Northern Cape - ZAR19 943 079; Free State - ZAR117 600 433; Eastern Cape - ZAR4 827 237; KwaZulu-Natal - ZAR66 027 879; Mpumalanga - ZAR43 938 376; Limpopo - ZAR46 486 017; Gauteng - NA; North West - ZAR84 319 786; South Africa - ZAR383 142 807. In summary, the respondents in six (6) of the seven (7) provinces ascribed the majority of the predation losses on cattle to the black-backed jackal. The exception was the Limpopo province where the leopard was implicated to account for most of the predation losses on cattle. In some provinces the second most predation losses were ascribed either to the caracal, brown hyaena, leopard, dogs or cheetah. It should be noted that some uncertainty may exist in the ability of farmers to identify positively the specific predator responsible for the losses. In some cases secondary scavenging on cattle may also have been mistaken for predation. It clearly calls for increased efforts to increase the skills of farmers to identify the specific methods used by predators to catch and eat their prey. The widespread negative impact of predation losses to sheep, goats and cattle can hardly be ignored any longer. A third study by the UFS will soon commence to estimate the impact of predation on the wildlife ranching sector. Currently the approach to manage predation is fragmented and uncoordinated. The scale and impact of predation in South Africa calls for a focused and coordinated predation management and research programme to reduce (mitigate) the negative impact of predation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    The economic impact of predation in the wildlife ranching industry in Limpopo, South Africa
    (University of the Free State, 2016-01) Schepers, Anche; De Waal, H. O.; Van Niekerk, H. N.; Matthews, N.
    South Africa has always been rich in wildlife species, but the population size has varied greatly over the past century. The incentive provided by the Game Theft Act, Act 105 of 1991 as amended, allowed individuals to engage in natural resource based private enterprises and gave rise to the rapid development of the wildlife industry. Losses due to predation is a large problem, not only in the small and large livestock industries, but losses have also been incurred in the wildlife ranching industry. There is not much known regarding wildlife numbers in South Africa, due to the difficulty in counting wildlife. Even though there are uncertainties regarding wildlife numbers, the number of animals sold on game auctions increased by 16.7% per year since 2009. The wildlife industry grew rapidly the past decade and is currently the sixth largest agricultural commodity in South Africa; every year more agricultural land previously devoted to livestock or crops are devoted to wildlife ranching. This detailed study was conducted in all the provinces of South Africa. The dissertation focussed on the situation in the Limpopo province; basic information regarding the other Provinces of South Africa are included in Appendices. The primary objective of the dissertation was to determine the economic implication of predation on the wildlife ranching industry of the Limpopo province, South Africa. This was not an easy task because of the large variety of wildlife species and because it is difficult to count wildlife. The wildlife species (antelope) were divided into three groups based on the reported predation incurred on wildlife ranches, namely: large antelope species, small antelope species and scarce species/colour variant antelope. The direct cost is associated with the number of animals lost due to predation, this ZAR value was calculated per hectare for each of the species defined in the three groups. The indirect cost is the total cost associated with the prevention and control of predation. The total indirect cost was calculated as ZAR 26.15/ha. The results obtained by calculating losses for the defined three scenarios provided an indication of how large the predation losses are on wildlife ranches. Calculating the total cost for the entire wildlife sector may lead to over or underestimations; therefore the total cost were calculated/ha. Any wildlife rancher can use the baseline information and calculate his/her own financial losses; for example: a wildlife rancher who keeps nyalas on 5 000 ha can calculate his/her estimated total cost to be ZAR 593 765/year. A wildlife rancher who keeps blesbok on 12 000 ha can incur a total cost of ZAR 668 103/year and a wildlife rancher who keeps black impala and Livingston eland on 6 000 ha can calculate his/her total cost to be ZAR 11 957 637/year. It was concluded from these three scenarios that the losses due to predation, as caculated in all three groups, were large; this is in line with the hypothesis. Factors that influence the occurrence and the level of predation were also determined by using Probit and Truncated regression models, respectively. The variables affecting the occurrence and the variables affecting the level of predation were different, and the variables affecting the three different groups varied as well. Propensity Score Matching was used to determine whether the method of counting wildlife has an effect on the level of predation. The method of counting had an effect on the level of predation on large antelope species and scarce species/colour variants, but not on small antelope species. This dissertation provides information for wildlife ranchers to calculate the total cost due to predation on their own specific wildlife ranches. They can improve their management practices and choose appropriate control methods, whether non-lethal, methods assisting wildlife ranchers or lethal methods. They can also view and adopt the more appropriate method to count their wildlife species.