No abstract

A study was conducted in the communities nearby the Serengeti National Park and Grumeti Game Reserve to investigate a spatial configuration of human-elephant interactions. Elephant crop damage was the most common adverse impact of the interactions. The researchers used geographic information systems to assess the distribution, hotspots, coldspots and relationships between elephant crop damage and environmental features in the Bunda District, Tanzania. The study unveiled six hotspots and three coldspots. Four hotspots occurred adjacent to Grumeti Game Reserve and two hotspots near the Serengeti National Park. Of all elephant crop damage incidents, 66% occurred in the village bordering Grumeti Game Reserve, 28% in the villages bordering the Serengeti National Park and 6% in the village the bordered none of the protected areas. There were significant hotspots of elephant crop damage in villages near Grumeti Game Reserve, and significant coldspots in the communities disconnected from protected areas. Trophy hunting in Grumeti Game Reserve is a probable factor for the presence of the significant hotspots as tourist hunting usually affects the movement and foraging behaviors of certain species. More importantly, unplanned hunting also affects the diversity of key ecological species that are habitat in the habitat manipulation and restoration. In addition, the geographical setting of the study might have contributed to the presence of many concentrations of crop damage incidents near Grumeti Game Reserve. As the majority, nine (75%) villages involved in the study are next to Grumeti Game Reserve and three (25%) villages border the Serengeti National Park. There was also a high concentration of elephant crop damage near rivers and protected areas, which decreased with increased geographical distance from the edge of these features.

Human-elephant interactions occur in the areas where people coexist with elephants. It happens in the communities neighbouring core wildlife protected areas. Human and elephants have coexisted since the beginning of agriculture. The relationship between humans and elephants has deteriorated since humans have increased their dependence on domesticated herbivores and encroached into elephant habitats. The interactions usually result in human deaths, elephant deaths, house demolitions, crop damage and secondary impacts. However, crop damage is the most reported negative impacts from the interactions. In this article, we reviewed the current situation of humanelephant interactions, extent, and nature of elephants' destruction, the contribution of elephants to ecological restorations and players in rural poverty alleviation. We also provided a conclusion on whether elephants are disastrous pests or agents of ecological restoration. Due to the exceptional anatomical, physiological and behavioural features, people perceive elephants as the most disastrous pests and merciless killers. In a similar way, secondary impacts, such as the unfairness of compensation schemes and intangible conservation benefits, influence negative perceptions and attitudes of people towards elephants.Elephants as agents of ecological restoration provide socio-economic benefits to humans through forest management because the seed dispersal of about 400 species of timber and nontimber forest species depend on the digestive tract of elephants. The livelihoods of about 1 billion poor people in the world depend on forests. On the other hand, elephants are not as destructive as other pests such as rodents, wild boars, and starlings, and they are not as killers as hippopotamus and crocodiles. When the positive and negative impacts of human-elephant interactions are summed up, conservation benefits provided to humans usually exceed conservation costs. The mismanagement of elephants leads to increasing negative impacts, if properly managed; elephants may provide significant contributions to environmental conservation and rural poverty alleviation.

No abstract