Shocking elephants: Fences and crop raiders in Laikipia District, Kenya

Thouless, C. R.; Sakwa, J.

doi:10.1016/0006-3207(94)00071-w

Cited by 122 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recognising the nature of the problem at hand, conflict mitigation calls for a combination of adaptive management strategies based on three elements: (1) the ecology and behaviour of elephants, (2) site-specific spatial and temporal determinants of conflict rather than density based indicators such as the number of people and elephants living together (Barnes and others 1995;Hoare 1999;Hoare and Du Toit 1999) and (3) the human sociopolitical and economic environments (Thouless and Sakwa 1995;O'Connell-Rodwell and others 2000;Inskip and Zimmermann 2009). The problem will only be solved when the local society decides that the perceived benefits derived from the presence of the elephants outweigh the perceived damage they cause.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A small proportion of individuals within a population can be the cause of HEC (Hoare 1999;Hoare 2001b;Nelson and others 2003). Even if currently confined to a few individuals, this novel behaviour could rapidly spread through the local population via cultural transmission and learning (Thouless and Sakwa 1995). Were that to happen, it could greatly compound an already severe conflict situation due to the high economic value of coffee.…”

Section: Coffee Berry Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Erratum to: Elephants Also Like Coffee: Trends and Drivers of Human–Elephant Conflicts in Coffee Agroforestry Landscapes of Kodagu, Western Ghats, India

Bal

Nath

Nanaya

et al. 2011

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kodagu district produces 2% of the world's coffee, in complex, multistoried agroforestry systems. The forests of the district harbour a large population of the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus). The combined effects of high elephant density and major landscape changes due to the expansion of coffee cultivation are the cause of human-elephant conflicts (HEC). Mitigation strategies, including electric fences and compensation schemes implemented by the Forest Department have met with limited success. Building on previous studies in the area, we assessed current spatial and temporal trends of conflict, analysed local stakeholders' perceptions and identified factors driving elephants into the estates. Our study, initiated in May 2007, shows that the intensity of HEC has increased over the last 10 years, exhibiting new seasonal patterns. Conflict maps and the lack of correlation between physical features of the coffee plantations and elephant visits suggest elephants move along corridors between the eastern and western forests of the district, opportunistically foraging when crossing the plantations. Dung analyses indicate elephants have selectively included ripe coffee berries in their diet. This is, to our knowledge, the first report of wild elephants feeding on coffee berries. If this new behaviour spreads through the population, it will compound an already severe conflict situation. The behavioural plasticity, the multiplicity of stakeholders involved, the difficulty in defining the problem and the limits of technical solutions already proposed suggest that HEC in Kodagu has the ingredients of a ''wicked'' problem whose resolution will require more shared understanding and problem solving work amongst the stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Coffee Berry Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Erratum to: Elephants Also Like Coffee: Trends and Drivers of Human–Elephant Conflicts in Coffee Agroforestry Landscapes of Kodagu, Western Ghats, India

Bal

Nath

Nanaya

et al. 2011

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Electric fences are widely considered the most effective and cost-effective strategy to control elephant cropraiding (Sukumar, 1989;Thouless & Sakwa, 1995). At Way Kambas, an initial attempt to construct 7 km of fence failed because the solar-powered electric current was insufficient, bull elephants used their tusks to destroy the fence, and fence posts were not sufficiently strong (Santiapillai & Suprahman, 1986;Ministry of Forestry, 1995).…”

Section: Possible Elephant Control Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the ubiquity of elephant-human conflict and the relatively high cost of various elephant control strategies now employed, few studies have analysed the reasons for their success or failure, or the impact of different protected area boundary and land-use types adjacent to elephant habitat on crop raiding (Seidensticker, 1984;Sukumar, 1989;Newmark et al, 1994;Thouless & Sakwa, 1995;Hill, 1998;Naughton-Treves, 1998). This is particularly true on the island of Sumatra, Indonesia, the only home of the Sumatran elephant E. m. sumatranus (Santiapillai & Jackson, 1990).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crop-raiding elephants and conservation implications at Way Kambas National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia

Nyhus¹,

Tilson

2000

ORX

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crop raiding by wild elephants is one of the most significant sources of park-people conflict in Sumatra, Indonesia. The distribution, impact and conservation implications of elephant crop-raiding in 13 villages that border Way Kambas National Park in southern Sumatra were studied for 18 months. The data are based on rapid village and field assessments, data logs maintained by village observers and a quantitative household survey. Elephants raided crops year-round at a mean rate of 0.53 elephants per day for the entire study area. The frequency of crop raiding was related to vegetation type along the park border, the size and presence of rivers, and the distance to the park's Elephant Training Center (ETC), which houses about 150 captive elephants. Wild elephants damaged at least 450,000 sq m of corn, rice, cassava, beans and other annual crops, and close to 900 coconut, banana and other perennial trees in the area surveyed. Elephants killed or injured 24 people over a 12-year period in villages near the park. Villagers try to reduce elephant damage by guarding fields, digging trenches between the park and their fields, and modifying their cropping patterns. Elephant-human conflict decreases the probability of support from local people for conservation efforts. We suggest methods to improve the effectiveness of existing elephant trenches, the need to consider electric fences, external support to affected villages, and compensation to villagers for any damage caused.

show abstract

“…The potential for conflict between humans and wildlife is increasing with the expansion of human populations, farming frontiers, and housing [3][4][5][6] into wildlife habitats. An expanding human population has put increased pressure on the tiger's habitat and its prey [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Movement and Activity Pattern of a Collared Tigress in a Human-Dominated Landscape in Central India

Athreya

Navya

Punjabi

et al. 2014

Tropical Conservation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tigers (Panthera tigris) are wide-ranging species, and a permeable landscape matrix outside Protected Areas (PAs) is extremely important for their dispersal. A tigress which had fallen in a water duct in the Nagpur district was rescued by the Forest Department on 12 th October, 2011 and released on 27 th November, 2011 in a forest adjacent to the site of capture. A GPS-GSM collar that we fitted on her indicated that she remained in the same forest area until 25 th December, 2011, and then moved eastwards into a human-dominated landscape where she was present until 25 th March, 2012, after which the GPS battery ceased to function. She moved a minimum distance of 454.65 km from the time of her release up to 25 th March, 2012, using a total area of 726 km 2 (95% MCP), but between 30 th December, 2011 and 25 th March, 2012, after moving into the human-dominated forestagricultural landscape her home range was 431 km 2 (95% MCP). Her home range also encompassed villages, roads and croplands. Her activity was largely nocturnal and she rested in dense foliage inside forest patches during the day. About half of all the prey items that we identified during this period (n = 12) were wild pigs (Sus scrofa). Although, she was present very close to areas where humans were active in the day, no untoward incident occurred. She was photographed in April 2013, a year after the collar stopped functioning, in the same region about 40 km from the release site, indicating that she is still present in the human-dominated area. Very little is known about tiger ecology, and their temporal and spatial patterns of movement, outside PAs. These areas will be crucial in terms of dispersal between PAs as well as sensitive in terms of conflict.

show abstract

Shocking elephants: Fences and crop raiders in Laikipia District, Kenya

Cited by 122 publications

References 9 publications

Erratum to: Elephants Also Like Coffee: Trends and Drivers of Human–Elephant Conflicts in Coffee Agroforestry Landscapes of Kodagu, Western Ghats, India

Erratum to: Elephants Also Like Coffee: Trends and Drivers of Human–Elephant Conflicts in Coffee Agroforestry Landscapes of Kodagu, Western Ghats, India

Crop-raiding elephants and conservation implications at Way Kambas National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia

Movement and Activity Pattern of a Collared Tigress in a Human-Dominated Landscape in Central India

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About