Using camera trap bycatch data to assess habitat use and the influence of human activity on African elephants (Loxodonta africana) in Kasungu National Park, Malawi

Abstract

African elephants (Loxodonta africana) are increasingly exposed to high levels of human disturbance and are threatened by poaching and human–elephant conflict. As anthropogenic pressures continue to increase, both inside and outside protected areas, understanding elephant behavioural responses to human activity is required for future conservation management. Here, we use bycatch data from camera trap surveys to provide inferences on elephant habitat use and temporal activity in Kasungu National Park (KNP), Malawi. The KNP elephant population has declined by ~ 95% since the late 1970s, primarily because of intensive poaching, and information on elephant ecology and behaviour can assist in the species’ recovery. Using occupancy modelling, we show that proximity to water is the primary driver of elephant habitat use in KNP, with sites closer to water having a positive effect on elephant site use. Our occupancy results suggest that elephants do not avoid sites of higher human activity, while results from temporal activity models show that elephants avoid peak times of human activity and exhibit primarily nocturnal behaviour when using the KNP road network. As key park infrastructure is located near permanent water sources, elephant spatiotemporal behaviour may represent a trade-off between resource utilisation and anthropogenic-risk factors, with temporal partitioning used to reduce encounter rates. Increased law enforcement activity around permanent water sources could help to protect the KNP elephant population during the dry season. Our findings highlight that camera trap bycatch data can be a useful tool for the conservation management of threatened species beyond the initial scope of research.

Protecting and connecting landscapes stabilizes populations of the Endangered savannah elephant

“…This result stems from only two insular protected areas in the poached regions. Possible explanations include more potential points of entry or lack of refuge and escape routes for elephants ( 56 , 57 ).…”