This secondary analysis used published survey data collected over one year to map where hazardous encounters between people and four large mammal species are most likely within and adjacent to the Ifakara-Lupiro-Mang'ula Wildlife Management Area (ILUMA WMA) and Nyerere National Park (NNP) in southern Tanzania. The authors aimed to estimate spatial encounter risk by identifying locations where recent signs of wildlife activity overlapped with evidence of human use and livelihood activities.
The analysis focused on four potentially dangerous species: elephant (Loxodonta africana), buffalo (Syncerus caffer), hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius) and hyena (Crocuta crocuta). The dataset used was a previously published set of field survey observations collected across the study area over one year. Presence of animals and people was inferred from indirect, recent activity indicators such as tracks, spoor and other signs recorded during those surveys. This indirect evidence formed the basis for spatial co-occurrence analysis rather than relying on direct records of realised conflict events.
Potential encounter risk was estimated using overlap indices that quantify co-occurrence between wildlife signs and human activities. By mapping where signs of both human and animal recent activity occurred together, the analysis identified geographic foci with elevated likelihood of encounters. The approach emphasizes spatiotemporal overlap of indirect indicators as a predictive measure of where hazardous interactions are most likely to occur.
The analysis revealed that encounter potential was not evenly distributed but concentrated around identifiable foci that differed between species and between types of human livelihood activity.
Elephant and buffalo: Potential for encountering the two most apparently important dangerous species, elephant and buffalo, was most closely associated with authorized fishing camps located within the ILUMA WMA and with the ecotone between substantially disturbed and largely intact natural land cover. These landscape features and resource-use locations emerged as key spatial correlates of elevated encounter potential for these species.
Hippopotamus: The greatest potential for encountering hippopotamus was found largely around two river beds identified in the study area, indicating strong habitat association driving spatial risk.
Hyena: Hyena encounter potential was more closely associated with established villages and converted lands near the western boundary of the ILUMA WMA, reflecting the species' affinity for areas altered by human settlement and land conversion.
The spatial patterns indicate that a one-size-fits-all, stand-alone intervention is unlikely to be effective across the WMA. Instead, mitigation should be targeted to reduce spatiotemporal overlap where people and specific species are likely to meet or should focus on protective measures that reduce harm when overlap cannot be avoided. Examples described conceptually in the study include keeping people and wildlife apart spatially and temporally and strengthening protections for people or wildlife at identified hotspots, though specific interventions were not enumerated in the source.
The authors highlight that mapping potential encounter risk using indirect activity indicators (tracks, spoor and other signs) provides a proactive and statistically powerful method to identify where hazardous encounters are most likely to occur. This contrasts with retrospective assessments based on much sparser observations of actual realised conflict events recorded after incidents have occurred. Proactive maps can therefore inform preventative planning and targeted management before conflicts happen.
This work is a secondary analysis of previously published survey data collected over a one-year period; details of the original survey protocols, sampling intensity and exact temporal resolution are contained in the source dataset. The study used indirect signs as proxies for recent activity; these indicators infer presence and recent use rather than document actual encounters or injuries. The authors provided a DOI and data/code links in the original publication. The authors declared no competing interests and reported funding sources.
Mapping co-occurrence of human and wildlife activity signs identified species-specific hotspots of potential encounters across the ILUMA WMA and adjacent NNP. Human-wildlife conflict mitigation in this landscape is likely to be most effective when targeted to the spatial and livelihood contexts identified — for example, near fishing camps, riverbeds and village margins — and when interventions aim to reduce or manage spatiotemporal overlap rather than relying on single, blanket measures. The study presents a spatial risk mapping framework intended to shift management from reactive responses after incidents to proactive prevention.
(Posted October 07, 2026. Funding and additional data/code links are reported in the original article; the authors declared no competing interests.)