Action

Put up signs to warn people about not feeding primates

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Source countries

Key messages

  • One review in Japan found that aggressive interactions between Japanese macaques and humans declined after prohibiting tourists from feeding of monkeys.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A review in 2010 at multiple sites in Japan found that aggressive interractions between free-ranging Japanese macaques Macaca fuscata and humans decreased after food provision by tourists was prohibited and the message was clearly transmitted. After decades of primate feeding by tourists, the practice was banned and the number of aggressive incidents of macaques on people decreased at multiple sites as well as the macaque road collisions at sites where tourists used to feed monkeys from the cars (no data included). The distance to tourists also increased after the ban (no data provided). No statistical tests were carried out to determine whether these differences were significant. The shop used by tourists to buy food for macaques at Takasakiyama Nature Zoo was closed in 1993 and the feeding of primates was prohibited and advertised using signs and direct advice by rangers during educational talks. In 1952-1972 food provisioning took place at 41 free-ranging monkey parks to attract tourists and reduce crop damage but resulted in rapidly increasing populations, crop and forest damage and the need to control macaques. Food provisioning by tourists was prohibited in the 1990s. 

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Junker, J., Kühl, H.S., Orth, L., Smith, R.K., Petrovan, S.O. & Sutherland, W.J. (2018) Primate conservation. Pages 393-445 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2018. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Primate Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Primate Conservation
Primate Conservation

Primate Conservation - Published 2017

Primate Synopsis

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation assesses the research looking at whether interventions are beneficial or not. It is based on summarised evidence in synopses, on topics such as amphibians, bats, biodiversity in European farmland, and control of freshwater invasive species. More are available and in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
Our Journal: Conservation Evidence

Our Journal:
Conservation Evidence

A unique, free to publish open-access journal publishing research and case studies that measure the effects of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 16

Special issues: Amphibian special issue

Go to the Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust