Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center
The migratory Sandhill Cranes in North America number in excess of 500,000 birds, and the harvest of more than 25,000 annually does not appear to harm the population as a whole. There is concern, however, that Greater Sandhill Cranes of the southern prairie regions of Canada may be seriously jeopardized by current management practices. They bear the brunt of the hunting in September, before most of the abundant Canadian and Lesser Sandhills arrive and before the season is closed to provide protection for the migrating Whooping Cranes.
Hunting of Eurasian Cranes and Demoiselle Cranes in Pakistan is a popular sport among wealthier hunters (see the Demoiselle Crane species account in Section 2). When capture techniques were restricted to the traditional method—tossing soya (ropes with weighted ends) into low-flying flocks at night—only a limited number of cranes was taken. In recent years, however, the number of firearms used by local people in Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan has risen, and more cranes have been shot. Although laws preventing the hunting of cranes in most areas of Pakistan are now being enforced, hunting continues unabated in tribal areas of the Northwest Frontier Province.
Hunting that occurs as a “spillover” effect of human conflict is often indiscriminate. In recent years, wildlife and wildlife habitat have suffered along with local people in many regions torn by war, civil unrest, and poverty. Such has been the case, for example, in Mozambique, Rwanda, and Cambodia. Under such circumstances, the margin of hope for survival of cranes and other large wild animals is thin.
Hazing cranes from agricultural fields is a temporary and often ineffective solution to the problem; the birds simply move to another farmer’s fields. However, the planting of lure crops near roosting areas has been effective in keeping cranes away from commercial crops. Incentive and compensation programs may also reduce the economic burden for farmers who occasionally experience heavy damage. In all cases, additional research is needed to ascertain the actual timing and extent of damage, and to devise mitigation techniques and programs.
Although successful in increasing populations, feeding stations have also concentrated cranes to an historically unprecedented degree. This increases the risk from disasters related to weather, hunting, communicable diseases, and poisons. This is why artificial feeding programs are not being used to provide for Whooping Cranes on their wintering grounds in Texas—despite concern that the territorial requirements of the cranes may limit the number that are able to utilize the available protected areas.
Many (though not all) crane conservationists oppose the hunting of cranes and the establishment of artificial feeding stations. Alternatives to hunting and artificial feeding include the protection and restoration of natural habitats and planting of lure crops in areas where crop damage is substantial. However, extenuating circumstances make hunting and/or feeding necessary. Especially for species and populations of cranes whose numbers are increasing, these issues are likely to present a growing challenge to conservationists seeking to harmonize human needs with those of cranes and other wildlife.