Spatio temporal dynamics of human elephant conflict in a valley of pineapple plantations

Poldej Kochprapa, Chution Savini, Dusit Ngoprasert, Tommaso Savini, George A. Gale
{"title":"Spatio temporal dynamics of human elephant conflict in a valley of pineapple plantations","authors":"Poldej Kochprapa,&nbsp;Chution Savini,&nbsp;Dusit Ngoprasert,&nbsp;Tommaso Savini,&nbsp;George A. Gale","doi":"10.1002/inc3.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Human−elephant conflict (HEC) is a major conservation challenge negatively impacting elephant populations and local agricultural livelihoods. Studies of drivers and spatiotemporal patterns of HEC have potential to indicate where mitigation actions should be prioritized with the goal of achieving long-term coexistence. We examined temporal and spatial patterns of elephant crop raiding adjacent to Kuiburi National Park in southern Thailand by assessing locations of elephant raids in conjunction with multiple environmental variables along with crop characteristics and crop availability. Raiding incidents primarily happened in pineapple plantations, however compositional analysis suggested that fruit orchards were most preferred by elephants probably reflecting the high frequency of raiding in orchards relative to their small spatial area. Logistic regression models predicted that crop type and crop maturity stage, distance to forest and mitigation strategy combined had the strongest support in explaining the probability of crop raiding. Relative probability of raiding appeared to be associated with crop accessibility for elephants and perhaps crop nutrient value, with orchards with ripe fruit being most raided, while oil palm the least. The most frequently used mitigation measure was guarding by local people and could lower the probability when compared with other mitigations, although the relative effectiveness did not show a clear pattern; local guarding, patrolling by park rangers and physical barriers appeared to have some benefit but elephant-preferred crops still had &gt;40% chance of being raided. Other results also indicated that water availability and season were not associated with elephant raiding, but rather crop type/crop stage had the most influence. The surprising lack of seasonality was likely due to the availability of the elephant's preferred crops year-round. Finally, our results indicated that there is no zone in Kuiburi that is free from elephant raiding, leaving the entire community vulnerable. We recommend improvements in the mitigation measures through better coordination among stakeholders in such communities and development of concrete action plans for all stakeholders including an extensive market-based examination of the feasibility of growing crops less preferred by elephants.</p>","PeriodicalId":100680,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Conservation","volume":"2 2","pages":"95-107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/inc3.23","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spatio-temporal dynamics of human−elephant conflict in a valley of pineapple plantations\\n 菠萝种植园中的人象冲突时空动态\",\"authors\":\"Poldej Kochprapa,&nbsp;Chution Savini,&nbsp;Dusit Ngoprasert,&nbsp;Tommaso Savini,&nbsp;George A. Gale\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/inc3.23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Human−elephant conflict (HEC) is a major conservation challenge negatively impacting elephant populations and local agricultural livelihoods. Studies of drivers and spatiotemporal patterns of HEC have potential to indicate where mitigation actions should be prioritized with the goal of achieving long-term coexistence. We examined temporal and spatial patterns of elephant crop raiding adjacent to Kuiburi National Park in southern Thailand by assessing locations of elephant raids in conjunction with multiple environmental variables along with crop characteristics and crop availability. Raiding incidents primarily happened in pineapple plantations, however compositional analysis suggested that fruit orchards were most preferred by elephants probably reflecting the high frequency of raiding in orchards relative to their small spatial area. Logistic regression models predicted that crop type and crop maturity stage, distance to forest and mitigation strategy combined had the strongest support in explaining the probability of crop raiding. Relative probability of raiding appeared to be associated with crop accessibility for elephants and perhaps crop nutrient value, with orchards with ripe fruit being most raided, while oil palm the least. The most frequently used mitigation measure was guarding by local people and could lower the probability when compared with other mitigations, although the relative effectiveness did not show a clear pattern; local guarding, patrolling by park rangers and physical barriers appeared to have some benefit but elephant-preferred crops still had &gt;40% chance of being raided. Other results also indicated that water availability and season were not associated with elephant raiding, but rather crop type/crop stage had the most influence. The surprising lack of seasonality was likely due to the availability of the elephant's preferred crops year-round. Finally, our results indicated that there is no zone in Kuiburi that is free from elephant raiding, leaving the entire community vulnerable. We recommend improvements in the mitigation measures through better coordination among stakeholders in such communities and development of concrete action plans for all stakeholders including an extensive market-based examination of the feasibility of growing crops less preferred by elephants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrative Conservation\",\"volume\":\"2 2\",\"pages\":\"95-107\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/inc3.23\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrative Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/inc3.23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/inc3.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人象冲突(HEC)是一项重大的保护挑战,对大象种群和当地农业生计产生了负面影响。对HEC的驱动因素和时空模式的研究有可能表明,为了实现长期共存,应优先采取缓解行动。我们通过评估大象袭击的地点以及多种环境变量以及作物特征和作物可用性,研究了泰国南部Kuiburi国家公园附近大象作物袭击的时间和空间模式。袭击事件主要发生在菠萝种植园,但成分分析表明,大象最喜欢果园,这可能反映出相对于较小的空间面积,果园的袭击频率较高。Logistic回归模型预测,作物类型和作物成熟期、离林距离和缓解策略的组合对解释作物袭击的可能性有最有力的支持。袭击的相对概率似乎与大象的作物可及性以及作物的营养价值有关,其中果实成熟的果园受到的袭击最多,而油棕受到的袭击最少。最常用的缓解措施是由当地人进行防护,与其他缓解措施相比,这种措施可以降低概率,尽管相对有效性没有显示出明确的模式;当地的守卫、公园管理员的巡逻和物理屏障似乎有一些好处,但大象喜欢的作物仍然有>;40%的几率被突袭。其他结果还表明,水的可用性和季节与大象袭击无关,但作物类型/作物阶段的影响最大。令人惊讶的缺乏季节性可能是由于全年都有大象喜欢的作物。最后,我们的研究结果表明,在Kuiburi没有一个地区没有大象袭击,整个社区都很脆弱。我们建议通过这些社区的利益相关者之间更好的协调来改进缓解措施,并为所有利益相关者制定具体的行动计划,包括对种植大象不太喜欢的作物的可行性进行广泛的市场审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Spatio-temporal dynamics of human−elephant conflict in a valley of pineapple plantations
      菠萝种植园中的人象冲突时空动态

Spatio-temporal dynamics of human−elephant conflict in a valley of pineapple plantations 菠萝种植园中的人象冲突时空动态

Human−elephant conflict (HEC) is a major conservation challenge negatively impacting elephant populations and local agricultural livelihoods. Studies of drivers and spatiotemporal patterns of HEC have potential to indicate where mitigation actions should be prioritized with the goal of achieving long-term coexistence. We examined temporal and spatial patterns of elephant crop raiding adjacent to Kuiburi National Park in southern Thailand by assessing locations of elephant raids in conjunction with multiple environmental variables along with crop characteristics and crop availability. Raiding incidents primarily happened in pineapple plantations, however compositional analysis suggested that fruit orchards were most preferred by elephants probably reflecting the high frequency of raiding in orchards relative to their small spatial area. Logistic regression models predicted that crop type and crop maturity stage, distance to forest and mitigation strategy combined had the strongest support in explaining the probability of crop raiding. Relative probability of raiding appeared to be associated with crop accessibility for elephants and perhaps crop nutrient value, with orchards with ripe fruit being most raided, while oil palm the least. The most frequently used mitigation measure was guarding by local people and could lower the probability when compared with other mitigations, although the relative effectiveness did not show a clear pattern; local guarding, patrolling by park rangers and physical barriers appeared to have some benefit but elephant-preferred crops still had >40% chance of being raided. Other results also indicated that water availability and season were not associated with elephant raiding, but rather crop type/crop stage had the most influence. The surprising lack of seasonality was likely due to the availability of the elephant's preferred crops year-round. Finally, our results indicated that there is no zone in Kuiburi that is free from elephant raiding, leaving the entire community vulnerable. We recommend improvements in the mitigation measures through better coordination among stakeholders in such communities and development of concrete action plans for all stakeholders including an extensive market-based examination of the feasibility of growing crops less preferred by elephants.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信