Elephants in the neighborhood: patterns of crop-raiding by Asian elephants within a fragmented landscape of Eastern India

Naha, Dipanjan; Dash, Sukanta Kumar; Chettri, Abhisek; Roy, Akashdeep; Sathyakumar, Sambandam

doi:10.7717/peerj.9399

Cited by 42 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the study area, elephants are the most predominant cause for crop loss due to wildlife in the region. This finding is supported by the previous studies in the region which looked at the distribution of elephants as well as crop losses due to elephants (Roy et al, 2017;Kshettry et al, 2020;Naha et al, 2020). However, this study for the first time compared losses due to wildlife with all reasons for crop damage in the region.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Proximity to forests had an effect on the crop damage with villages within 1.5 km of forests reporting wildlife as the main cause for damage whereas villages further away reported insect pests as the main source of crop damage (Figure 3). A previous study conducted in the landscape has also found crop damage due to elephants was high within a 1.5 km buffer of forested areas (Naha et al, 2020). We also found that the wildlife species apart from elephants were also responsible for crop damage, albeit at low proportions including species, such as peafowl, wild pig, and macaque.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mahakal Blessed My Crop: Community Dynamics and Religious Beliefs Influence Efficacy of a Wildlife Compensation Program

Kshettry

Bhave²,

Das³

et al. 2021

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation conflicts or human-wildlife conflicts present one of the foremost challenges to wildlife conservation globally. The challenges of reconciling human safety and food security with the conservation of large-bodied wildlife are further compounded in the developing nations with a high spatial overlap of wildlife with people. Therefore, conservation models are required to offset losses faced by affected communities while at the same time ensuring the long-term conservation of wildlife species in shared spaces. Ex-gratia payment is one such widely used conflict mitigation instrument that aims to reduce losses and increase tolerance toward damage-causing wildlife species. However, the efficacy of such programs is rarely investigated and the complex interplay of local beliefs, traditions, and community dynamics are rarely incorporated in the compensation programs. This paper aimed to study an ex-gratia payment program for crop losses in India using ecological, economic, and social lenses. In this study, we used 119 interview surveys across 30 villages. Linear models and thematic analysis were used to understand the sources of crop losses, the propensity to claim ex-gratia payments, and the reasons for claiming or not claiming. We find that even though wildlife is the major cause of crop loss in the region, especially to elephants, the majority of the respondents (53%) did not claim compensation for the losses. The reasons varied from procedural failures to a negative evaluation of the process or the agency involved but the most recurrent reason for not claiming was a deep religious belief in certain communities on the elephant God, “Mahakal.” Our work indicates that the cultural reverence toward the species is enabling the acceptance of losses. We propose that such complex cultural beliefs and local traditions should be considered when designing schemes that aim to garner conservation support toward damage-causing wildlife species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Mahakal Blessed My Crop: Community Dynamics and Religious Beliefs Influence Efficacy of a Wildlife Compensation Program

Kshettry

Bhave²,

Das³

et al. 2021

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mixed herd elephants rarely attacked humans (<5% of the incidents) although they are involved in crop raiding during migration through agriculture areas or settlements (Naha et al., 2020 ). Solitary adult bull elephants caused majority of attacks on humans in Nepal (Acharya et al., 2016 ) but it varied among elephant individuals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns and determinants of elephant attacks on humans in Nepal

Ram

Mondol

Subedi

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attacks on humans by Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) is an extreme form of human–elephant conflict. It is a serious issue in southern lowland Nepal where elephant‐related human fatalities are higher than other wildlife. Detailed understanding of elephant attacks on humans in Nepal is still lacking, hindering to devising appropriate strategies for human–elephant conflict mitigation. This study documented spatiotemporal pattern of elephant attacks on humans, factors associated with the attacks, and human/elephant behavior contributing to deaths of victims when attacked. We compiled all the documented incidences of elephant attacks on humans in Nepal for last 20 years across Terai and Chure region of Nepal. We also visited and interviewed 412 victim families (274 fatalities and 138 injuries) on elephant attacks. Majority of the victims were males (87.86%) and had low level of education. One fourth of the elephant attacks occurred while chasing the elephants. Solitary bulls or group of subadult males were involved in most of the attack. We found higher number of attacks outside the protected area. People who were drunk and chasing elephants using firecrackers were more vulnerable to the fatalities. In contrast, chasing elephants using fire was negatively associated with the fatalities. Elephant attacks were concentrated in proximity of forests primarily affecting the socioeconomically marginalized communities. Integrated settlement, safe housing for marginalized community, and community grain house in the settlement should be promoted to reduce the confrontation between elephants and humans in entire landscape for their long‐term survival.

show abstract

“…According to Tripathy et al [26], since house damage occurred frequently in the villages of the study area, we assumed that elephant detection might be higher near rural built-up, especially in the forest fringe zone, while there will be lesser detection closer to urban areas. Although elephants prefer to forage in croplands, which are an easily accessible food source, crop raiding is a source of HEC [53,[92][93][94], which poses a serious threat to elephants. We used a Sentinel-2 Level-1C product of 10 m resolution to extract settlements, croplands, water bodies, and mining, which was later improved for classification accuracy using Google Earth products.…”

Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Elephants struggle to live in human-populated areas, due to the negative impacts of linear infrastructure (road and railway networks, drains, canals, and wells), mining, settlements, and electrocution, along with retaliatory killing [92,[94][95][96][97]. Elephants were present even in areas with a human density of ~2300 persons/km 2 in the central region of the study area; whereas, a previous study [103] had stated that elephants did not coexist with humans when the density reached ~15.6 persons/km 2 .…”

Section: Variables Influencing Elephant Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Landscape Connectivity among the Habitats of Asian Elephants in Keonjhar Forest Division, India

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land development has impacted natural landforms extensively, causing a decline in resources and negative consequences to elephant populations, habitats, and gene flow. Often, elephants seek to fulfill basic needs by wandering into nearby human communities, which leads to human–elephant conflict (HEC), a serious threat to conserving this endangered species. Understanding elephant space use and connectivity among their habitats can offset barriers to ecological flow among fragmented populations. We focused on the Keonjhar Forest Division in Eastern India, where HEC has resulted in the deaths of ~300 people and several hundred elephants, and damaged ~4100 houses and ~12,700 acres of cropland between 2001 and 2018. Our objectives were to (1) analyze elephant space use based on their occupancy; (2) map connectivity by considering the land structure and HEC occurrences; (3) assess the quality of mapped connectivity and identify potential bottlenecks. We found that (1) the study area has the potential to sustain a significant elephant population by providing safe connectivity; (2) variables like forests, precipitation, rural built-up areas, cropland, and transportation networks were responsible for predicting elephant presence (0.407, SE = 0.098); (3) five habitat cores, interconnected by seven corridors were identified, of which three habitat cores were vital for maintaining connectivity; (4) landscape features, such as cropland, rural built-up, mining, and transportation networks created bottlenecks that could funnel elephant movement. Our findings also indicate that overlooking HEC in connectivity assessments could lead to overestimation of functionality. The study outcomes can be utilized as a preliminary tool for decision making and early planning during development projects.

show abstract

Elephants in the neighborhood: patterns of crop-raiding by Asian elephants within a fragmented landscape of Eastern India

Cited by 42 publications

References 65 publications

Mahakal Blessed My Crop: Community Dynamics and Religious Beliefs Influence Efficacy of a Wildlife Compensation Program

Mahakal Blessed My Crop: Community Dynamics and Religious Beliefs Influence Efficacy of a Wildlife Compensation Program

Patterns and determinants of elephant attacks on humans in Nepal

Analysis of Landscape Connectivity among the Habitats of Asian Elephants in Keonjhar Forest Division, India

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About