Lucy E. King, Lydia Tiller, Emmanuel Mwambingu, Esther Serem, Hesron Nzumu, Gloria Mugo, Naiya Raja, Ewan Brennan, Derick Kisiang'ani Wanjala, Victor Ndombi, Kennedy Leneuyia, Harry Williams, Fredrick Lala, Frank Pope, Iain Douglas-Hamilton
{"title":"肯尼亚 9 年间干旱和发展对蜂箱围栏阻遏大象效果的影响","authors":"Lucy E. King, Lydia Tiller, Emmanuel Mwambingu, Esther Serem, Hesron Nzumu, Gloria Mugo, Naiya Raja, Ewan Brennan, Derick Kisiang'ani Wanjala, Victor Ndombi, Kennedy Leneuyia, Harry Williams, Fredrick Lala, Frank Pope, Iain Douglas-Hamilton","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Human–elephant conflict is growing in Africa as human populations and development increases, creating disturbance to elephant habitats. Beehive fences have been trialed as a coexistence tool with some success but all studies have looked at small sample sizes over a short time period. Our study analyses the behavior of African elephants (<i>Loxodonta africana</i>) that approached a network of beehive fence protected farms in two conflict villages over 9 years next to Tsavo East National Park. We compare differences in elephant raids and beehive occupation rates annually, during a drought, and during peak crop production seasons. Out of 3999 elephants approaching our study farms 1007 elephants broke the beehive fence and entered the protected farm areas (25.18%). This was significantly less than the 2649 encounters where elephants remained either outside the farm boundary or broke into the control farms (66.24%). A further 343 elephants entered the farm by walking through a gap at the end of a fence (8.56%). The annual beehive fence break-through rates averaged 23.96% (±SE 3.15) resulting in a mean of 76.04% elephants deterred from beehive fences protected farm plots. Over six peak crop growing seasons the beehive fences kept between 78.3% and 86.3% of elephants out of the farms and crops. The beehive fences produced one ton of honey sold for $2250; however, a drought caused a 75% reduction in hive occupation rates and honey production for 3 years after negatively impacting honey profits and the effectiveness of the fences. Beehive fences are very effective at reducing up to 86.3% of elephant crop-raids during peak crop seasons after good rainfall, but any increase in elephant habitat disturbance or the frequency and duration of droughts could reduce their effectiveness as a successful coexistence tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"6 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13242","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of drought and development on the effectiveness of beehive fences as elephant deterrents over 9 years in Kenya\",\"authors\":\"Lucy E. King, Lydia Tiller, Emmanuel Mwambingu, Esther Serem, Hesron Nzumu, Gloria Mugo, Naiya Raja, Ewan Brennan, Derick Kisiang'ani Wanjala, Victor Ndombi, Kennedy Leneuyia, Harry Williams, Fredrick Lala, Frank Pope, Iain Douglas-Hamilton\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/csp2.13242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Human–elephant conflict is growing in Africa as human populations and development increases, creating disturbance to elephant habitats. Beehive fences have been trialed as a coexistence tool with some success but all studies have looked at small sample sizes over a short time period. Our study analyses the behavior of African elephants (<i>Loxodonta africana</i>) that approached a network of beehive fence protected farms in two conflict villages over 9 years next to Tsavo East National Park. We compare differences in elephant raids and beehive occupation rates annually, during a drought, and during peak crop production seasons. Out of 3999 elephants approaching our study farms 1007 elephants broke the beehive fence and entered the protected farm areas (25.18%). This was significantly less than the 2649 encounters where elephants remained either outside the farm boundary or broke into the control farms (66.24%). A further 343 elephants entered the farm by walking through a gap at the end of a fence (8.56%). The annual beehive fence break-through rates averaged 23.96% (±SE 3.15) resulting in a mean of 76.04% elephants deterred from beehive fences protected farm plots. Over six peak crop growing seasons the beehive fences kept between 78.3% and 86.3% of elephants out of the farms and crops. The beehive fences produced one ton of honey sold for $2250; however, a drought caused a 75% reduction in hive occupation rates and honey production for 3 years after negatively impacting honey profits and the effectiveness of the fences. Beehive fences are very effective at reducing up to 86.3% of elephant crop-raids during peak crop seasons after good rainfall, but any increase in elephant habitat disturbance or the frequency and duration of droughts could reduce their effectiveness as a successful coexistence tool.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Science and Practice\",\"volume\":\"6 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13242\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Science and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13242\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13242","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of drought and development on the effectiveness of beehive fences as elephant deterrents over 9 years in Kenya
Human–elephant conflict is growing in Africa as human populations and development increases, creating disturbance to elephant habitats. Beehive fences have been trialed as a coexistence tool with some success but all studies have looked at small sample sizes over a short time period. Our study analyses the behavior of African elephants (Loxodonta africana) that approached a network of beehive fence protected farms in two conflict villages over 9 years next to Tsavo East National Park. We compare differences in elephant raids and beehive occupation rates annually, during a drought, and during peak crop production seasons. Out of 3999 elephants approaching our study farms 1007 elephants broke the beehive fence and entered the protected farm areas (25.18%). This was significantly less than the 2649 encounters where elephants remained either outside the farm boundary or broke into the control farms (66.24%). A further 343 elephants entered the farm by walking through a gap at the end of a fence (8.56%). The annual beehive fence break-through rates averaged 23.96% (±SE 3.15) resulting in a mean of 76.04% elephants deterred from beehive fences protected farm plots. Over six peak crop growing seasons the beehive fences kept between 78.3% and 86.3% of elephants out of the farms and crops. The beehive fences produced one ton of honey sold for $2250; however, a drought caused a 75% reduction in hive occupation rates and honey production for 3 years after negatively impacting honey profits and the effectiveness of the fences. Beehive fences are very effective at reducing up to 86.3% of elephant crop-raids during peak crop seasons after good rainfall, but any increase in elephant habitat disturbance or the frequency and duration of droughts could reduce their effectiveness as a successful coexistence tool.