Abstract
Abstract
In multiuse areas outside formal protection, sustaining both wildlife and people is critical to wildlife conservation and coexistence efforts. Botswana's Kalahari hosts one of sub‐Saharan Africa’s largest unprotected areas supporting free‐ranging wildlife. The role of multiuse areas as a wildlife habitat and movement corridor is increasingly threatened by land‐use change, particularly the expansion of sedentary livestock farming. In light of these changes, updated information on wildlife status and their use of these areas is lacking. Leveraging the Kalahari's sandy substrate and Indigenous tracking skills, we demonstrated the potential of animal track surveys for large‐scale wildlife monitoring. We conducted biannual surveys over 3 years across 22,000 km
2
of multiuse wildlife management areas and used the Formozov–Malyshev–Pereleshin formula approach—a population density estimator—to collect large herbivore and carnivore track data. We analyzed 22,793 tracks from 13 species collected over 6222 km of transects with three objectives: estimate species population densities, identify key environmental predictors of their spatial variation, and derive predictive maps to highlight higher wildlife density areas. Although some herbivores declined, no changes in carnivore densities were detected over the study period. Cattleposts were negatively associated with most species, whereas burned areas showed contrasting associations with herbivore and carnivore densities. Vegetation characteristics and distance to mineral pans were also often associated with species density. The region still supports large wildlife and potential movement pathways—albeit less than in the past—especially away from human activity. We identified key areas for preservation in future land‐use planning, with potential to also support nature‐based livelihood development. Where tracking substrates and Indigenous knowledge coexist around the world, track‐based monitoring can effectively inform conservation. Its cultural and economic benefits to local communities, in addition to relational engagement with the natural world, may also contribute to human–wildlife coexistence, uphold land rights, and support community‐led resource management.