A Solution for the Elephant-Human Conflict

Gamage, Amalinda; Wijesundara, Malitha

doi:10.1109/tiiec.2014.036

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the installation and regular monitoring and maintenance of these playback systems present logistical challenges in remote areas. Although reportedly 65-100% effective in the tests performed (Thuppil and Coss, 2016), the potentially negative feedbacks of audio playbacks on other species merit further assessment before wider adoption (Gamage and Wijesundara, 2014;Zeppelzauer et al, 2015). Recent studies in Africa show promising results using bio-acoustic methods such as beehive fences to deter elephants, and have the added benefit of providing pollinators and honey (King et al, 2011(King et al, , 2017.…”

Section: Acoustic Deterrentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Management Strategies and Future Directions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-elephant conflict is a major conservation concern in elephant range countries. A variety of management strategies have been developed and are practiced at different scales for preventing and mitigating human-elephant conflict. However, human-elephant conflict remains pervasive as the majority of existing prevention strategies are driven by site-specific factors that only offer short-term solutions, while mitigation strategies frequently transfer conflict risk from one place to another. Here, we review current human-elephant conflict management strategies and describe an interdisciplinary conceptual approach to manage species coexistence over the long-term. Our proposed model identifies shared resource use between humans and elephants at different spatial and temporal scales for development of long-term solutions. The model also highlights the importance of including anthropological and geographical knowledge to find sustainable solutions to managing human-elephant conflict.

show abstract

Section: Acoustic Deterrentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Management Strategies and Future Directions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fernando et al (2005), Gunaryadi et al (2017), have mentioned that different types of acoustic deterrents are practiced by farmers such as guarding crop, scaring crop-raiding animals away, yelling, setting off firecrackers, carbide cannons, throwing stones, or other things to hit an animal which are effective to keep animals away from the farm fields (Davies et al 2011). Creating threatening sounds using audio playback also another type of method used to chase crop-raiding animals but it is effective only for short terms and short distance due to quick learning, habituation, and adoption to those by animals and returns to raid crop (Thuppil and Coss 2016;Wijayagunawardane et al 2016;Moss 1988;Gamage and Wijesundara 2014). From history, dogs were the first animal used as a guard to protect the herds in different parts of the world.…”

Section: Regulated Harvesting and Storingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The falling out man and the wild - a review of influential factors, causes, impacts, and strategies for minimizing human-wildlife conflict

Suratissa

2021

Trop Agric Res & Ext

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) is negatively acting on both humans and wildlife equally alike as it affects the coexistence of natural resources leading to loss, fragmentation, and degradations of wildlife habitats. Apart from this, direct and indirect effects result on both humans and wildlife; loss of lives is the major direct impact affecting both counterparts. This paper is reviewing the reasons for arising of HWC, causes of HWC, major impacts on HWC, and different preventive and mitigatory measures practiced in different parts of the world.

show abstract

“…These tools were used to reduce HEC if the position of elephants in space and time could be determined. The other three studies focus on the presence of mobile phones in rural conflict contexts (Gamage and Wijesundara 2014), which allow the use of Global System for Mobile communications. Likewise, they show improved communication during an early warning of conflict between humans and elephants with authorities to coordinate responses to incidents (Sitati et al 2005;Le Bel et al 2014).…”

Section: Introduction Of Connected Digital Damage Assessment Tools Fo...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of connected digital tools to assess elephant damage on plantations can be added to the services that phones can provide in HEC management. Indeed, limiting the use of mobile phones to improve communication between HEC stakeholders highlights certain difficulties, such as network coverage in forest areas (Gamage and Wijesundara 2014;Lewis et al 2016). The use of more accessible satellite monitoring (Annasiwaththa et al 2012) therefore facilitates the use of digital tools in the assessment of damage caused by elephants, as they are used in other aspects of conflicts between man and wildlife.…”

Section: Introduction Of Connected Digital Damage Assessment Tools Fo...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analytical review of methods and tools for assessing crop damage caused by elephants: implications of new information technologies

N'SAFOU MBANI,

NGAMA,

TCHAMBA

et al. 2024

Bois for. trop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The devastation of crops by elephants is increasingly fuelling the anger of farmers in the human-elephant conflict. However, the crop damage attributed to elephants by farmers appears disproportionate. Despite the fact that observed crop damage has an impact on the lives of local populations, the assessment of damage remains a controversial issue. The multitude of evaluation methods used by informants makes it difficult to compare results from different areas and to harmonise and/or transpose management strategies. It is therefore wise to take an interest in evaluation methods, to know their constraints, their advantages, and their connection points. This is the purpose of this study, which offers a bibliographic synthesis of the subject based on documentary research and a synthetic analysis of articles and documents. Two types of damage assessment emerge: quantitative and qualitative. Each type of assessment requires different assessment methods, which can be combined to obtain more accurate results. A qualitative assessment can be carried out through interviews, questionnaires, bibliographic research/review, etc., and a quantitative assessment through a total site visit, a visit to conflict hot and cold spots, or a visit to a random sample of the site. Ratings can be combined because qualitative rating is subjective. Many informants use it because it is easy to carry out and gives an idea of the state of devastation of cultures and sociological constraints. Quantitative assessment requires resources but provides results on the ground. However, combining different types of assessment improves the accuracy, reliability of results, and understanding of the conflict. This bibliographic synthesis also reveals that damage assessment tools are today moving towards new information and communication technologies, because these make the work easier and more practical while improving precision.

show abstract

A Solution for the Elephant-Human Conflict

Cited by 8 publications

References 2 publications

Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Management Strategies and Future Directions

Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Management Strategies and Future Directions

The falling out man and the wild - a review of influential factors, causes, impacts, and strategies for minimizing human-wildlife conflict

Analytical review of methods and tools for assessing crop damage caused by elephants: implications of new information technologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About