Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.9
2.7
Journals
Animals
Special Issues
Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare
share announcement

Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Wildlife".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 January 2024) | Viewed by 17943

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Bruce Alexander Schulte

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department Head of Biology, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY, USA
Interests: behavior; conservation; mammalian ecosystem engineers; elephants
Dr. Chase LaDue

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Oklahoma City Zoo and Botanical Garden, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Interests: applied animal behavior; conservation biology; elephants; mammals; zoo biology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Conservation behavior invokes empirical and theoretical components of animal behavior to solve conservation problems and preserve threatened species. Both proximate and ultimate aspects of behavior are considered in understanding adaptive decision-making by animals and subsequently designing management options. As ecosystem engineers and flagship species, elephants (including African bush elephants, African forest elephants, and Asian elephants, all of which are endangered or critically endangered) play a formative role in the ecology and biodiversity of their landscapes. Indeed, most elephants are now managed by humans, from carefully controlled ex situ populations (e.g., zoos and similar wildlife parks) to elephants that live within in situ reserves but that do not receive provisions. However, the conservation issues that elephants face are not homogenous across these settings or geographic locations. For example, human pressures that impact elephant activity can compress these animals to the point where they degrade habitat quality and reduce biodiversity. Further, human–elephant interactions range from positive such as via inobtrusive tourism to highly negative when competition for resources leads to injury or death of humans and/or elephants. Thus, adaptive management strategies that integrate conservation behavior approaches are needed to establish sustainable populations that also do not negatively impact other species with which they share their habitat. Elephants’ size, food requirements, social nature, cognitive abilities, and charismatic appeal present challenges to managing their habitats and their coexistence with humans. Population-level management techniques are often inadequate without consideration of individual variation. As we increase our understanding of elephant biology, we can apply our knowledge to improving human–elephant interactions across the range of environments where elephants exist. This special issue presents in situ and ex situ behavioral and related disciplines studies on elephant biology and the potential or realized application of this information to elephant management.  

Dr. Bruce Alexander Schulte
Dr. Chase LaDue
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • conservation behavior
  • management
  • human elephant interaction

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (6 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

17 pages, 3287 KiB  
Article
Testing the Effectiveness of the “Smelly” Elephant Repellent in Controlled Experiments in Semi-Captive Asian and African Savanna Elephants
by Marion R. Robertson, Lisa J. Olivier, John Roberts, Laddawan Yonthantham, Constance Banda, Innocent B. N’gombwa, Rachel Dale and Lydia N. Tiller
Animals 2023, 13(21), 3334; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13213334 - 26 Oct 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2636
Abstract
Crop-raiding by elephants is one of the most prevalent forms of human–elephant conflict and is increasing with the spread of agriculture into wildlife range areas. As the magnitude of conflicts between people and elephants increases across Africa and Asia, mitigating and reducing the [...] Read more.
Crop-raiding by elephants is one of the most prevalent forms of human–elephant conflict and is increasing with the spread of agriculture into wildlife range areas. As the magnitude of conflicts between people and elephants increases across Africa and Asia, mitigating and reducing the impacts of elephant crop-raiding has become a major focus of conservation intervention. In this study, we tested the responses of semi-captive elephants to the “smelly” elephant repellent, a novel olfactory crop-raiding mitigation method. At two trial sites, in Zambia and Thailand, African elephants (Loxodonta africana) and Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) were exposed to the repellent, in order to test whether or not they entered an area protected by the repellent and whether they ate the food provided. The repellent elicited clear reactions from both study groups of elephants compared to control conditions. Generalised linear models revealed that the elephants were more alert, sniffed more, and vocalised more when they encountered the repellent. Although the repellent triggered a response, it did not prevent elephants from entering plots protected by the repellent or from eating crops, unlike in trials conducted with wild elephants. Personality played a role in responses towards the repellent, as the elephants that entered the experimental plots were bolder and more curious individuals. We conclude that, although captive environments provide controlled settings for experimental testing, the ecological validity of testing human–elephant conflict mitigation methods with captive wildlife should be strongly considered. This study also shows that understanding animal behaviour is essential for improving human–elephant coexistence and for designing deterrence mechanisms. Appreciating personality traits in elephants, especially amongst “problem” elephants who have a greater propensity to crop raid, could lead to the design of new mitigation methods designed to target these individuals. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 2493 KiB  
Article
Attitudes towards the Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices to Manage Wild Elephant Movement
by Surendranie J. Cabral de Mel, Saman Seneweera, Ashoka Dangolla, Devaka K. Weerakoon, Tek Maraseni and Benjamin L. Allen
Animals 2023, 13(16), 2657; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162657 - 18 Aug 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2865
Abstract
Aversive geofencing devices (AGDs) or animal-borne satellite-linked shock collars might become a useful tool to mitigate human-elephant conflict (HEC). AGDs have the potential to condition problem elephants to avoid human-dominated landscapes by associating mild electric shocks with preceding audio warnings given as they [...] Read more.
Aversive geofencing devices (AGDs) or animal-borne satellite-linked shock collars might become a useful tool to mitigate human-elephant conflict (HEC). AGDs have the potential to condition problem elephants to avoid human-dominated landscapes by associating mild electric shocks with preceding audio warnings given as they approach virtual boundaries. We assessed the opinions of different stakeholders (experts, farmers, and others who have and have not experienced HEC; n = 611) on the potential use of AGDs on Asian elephants. Most respondents expressed positive opinions on the potential effectiveness of AGDs in managing elephant movement (62.2%). About 62.8% respondents also provided positive responses for the acceptability of AGDs if pilot studies with captive elephants have been successful in managing their movements. Some respondents perceived AGDs to be unacceptable because they are unethical or harmful and would be unsuccessful given wild elephants may respond differently to AGDs than captive elephants. Respondents identified acceptability, support and awareness of stakeholders, safety and wellbeing of elephants, logistical difficulties, durability and reliable functionality of AGDs, and uncertainties in elephants’ responses to AGDs as potential challenges for implementing AGDs. These issues need attention when developing AGDs to increase support from stakeholders and to effectively reduce HEC incidents in the future. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 301 KiB  
Article
Seasonal Effects on Body Condition and Characteristics of the Estrous Cycle in Captive Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus) in Thailand: A Retrospective Study
by Yuqing Yang, Padet Tummaruk, Taweepoke Angkawanish, Warangkhana Langkaphin and Kaywalee Chatdarong
Animals 2023, 13(7), 1133; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13071133 - 23 Mar 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2108
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of season on the body condition score (BCS), the characteristics of the estrous cycle (luteal phase [LPL], follicular phase [FPL], estrous cycle [ECL] lengths, and the start of the luteal phase [SLP] and [...] Read more.
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of season on the body condition score (BCS), the characteristics of the estrous cycle (luteal phase [LPL], follicular phase [FPL], estrous cycle [ECL] lengths, and the start of the luteal phase [SLP] and follicular phase [SFP]), and progesterone levels (baseline and peak) of eight captive Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in Thailand. From 2014 to 2019, blood samples were collected weekly for serum progesterone enzyme immunoassays (EIAs). Estrous cycles (n = 70), including the luteal and follicular phases, and BCS (n = 70) were recorded. Based on the BCS, the LPL, FPL, and ECL were assigned to the following two groups: normal (BCS = 3.0–4.0, n = 38) and overweight (BCS = 4.5–5.0, n = 32). The findings demonstrated that there was no difference in LPL between the groups. However, in the normal group, the ECL was one week longer (14.9 ± 1.7 vs. 13.9 ± 1.7 weeks; p < 0.05), and the FPL also tended to be one week longer (7.2 ± 1.7 vs. 6.4 ± 1.5 weeks; p = 0.06) than in the overweight group. The mean progesterone level during the rainy, hot, and cool seasons was not statistically different. Based on the yearly averaged BCS from three seasons, the baseline and peak levels of progesterone were classified into the normal (n = 16) and overweight (n = 12) groups. Females with a normal BCS tended to exhibit higher progesterone peak levels (p = 0.08). The majority of peaks appeared during the rainy season (53.57%). The BCS was highest during the hot (4.47) and rainy (4.38) seasons, but not during the cool (4.12) season. The LPL, FPL, and ECL were not affected by the season in which the luteal phase occurred. On the other hand, the rainy season had a significant effect on the SFP, resulting in a longer LPL (p < 0.05) and ECL (p = 0.01); both were the longest during the rainy season. In conclusion, the effects of season on BCS may be related to characteristics of the estrous cycle and peak progesterone levels. Ultimately, these findings provide ground knowledge to assist elephant managers and owners in planning breeding activities using seasonal effects and BCS measurements in tropical climates. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare)
12 pages, 3001 KiB  
Article
Elephant Scar Prevalence in the Kasigau Wildlife Corridor, Kenya: Echoes of Human-Elephant Conflict
by Lynn Von Hagen, Chase A. LaDue and Bruce A. Schulte
Animals 2023, 13(4), 605; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13040605 - 9 Feb 2023
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2802
Abstract
Human–elephant conflict (HEC) compromises crop security and threatens elephant conservation. Most commonly, HEC manifests as crop-foraging as elephants modify natural foraging strategies to incorporate crops. Farmers may retaliate by frightening or harming elephants, leaving scars from inflicted wounds. We assessed the prevalence and [...] Read more.
Human–elephant conflict (HEC) compromises crop security and threatens elephant conservation. Most commonly, HEC manifests as crop-foraging as elephants modify natural foraging strategies to incorporate crops. Farmers may retaliate by frightening or harming elephants, leaving scars from inflicted wounds. We assessed the prevalence and distribution of scars on the bodies of African savanna elephants (Loxodonta africana) observed in the Kasigau Wildlife Corridor (KWC), part of the Greater Tsavo Ecosystem of Kenya, where conflict is prevalent. We surmised that scars on the body are largely a result of HEC as opposed to scars on the rump or head, which we attributed primarily to elephant–elephant conflict. We hypothesized that: (1) male elephants would have more scars than females; (2) older males would be more likely to have scars than younger males; and (3) most scars would be located on the bodies of elephants. We assessed scars from a photographic catalogue of elephants from the KWC. In line with our hypotheses, male elephants were more likely to have scars than females (32% of males compared to 6% of females); older males had significantly more scars than younger males (61% compared to 24%); and the majority of scars (89%) were located on the body. Scar presence may be useful as an animal-centered indicator to estimate the prevalence and demographic patterns of HEC. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 3198 KiB  
Article
Identifying the Effects of Social Disruption through Translocation on African Elephants (Loxodonta africana), with Specifics on the Social and Ecological Impacts of Orphaning
by Marion E. Garaï, Victoria L. Boult and Heike R. Zitzer
Animals 2023, 13(3), 483; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13030483 - 30 Jan 2023
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3129
Abstract
African elephants (Loxodonta africana) exhibit a long developmental period during which they acquire complex social and ecological knowledge through social networks. Central to this is that matriarchs and older individuals play an important role as repositories of information gained through experience. [...] Read more.
African elephants (Loxodonta africana) exhibit a long developmental period during which they acquire complex social and ecological knowledge through social networks. Central to this is that matriarchs and older individuals play an important role as repositories of information gained through experience. Anthropogenic interventions—including poaching, culling, translocation, and hunting—can disrupt elephants’ social networks, with implications for individual fitness and potential long-term population viability. Here, we draw on a unique long-running, individual-based dataset to examine the impacts of translocation on a population of elephants in South Africa, taking into consideration demographic rates, social dynamics, and ecological decision-making. Specifically, we compared two translocated groups: a group of unrelated culling Orphans and a family herd. We found that the Orphan group experienced accelerated reproductive rates when compared with the family herd. The Orphan group also fissioned more frequently and for longer periods of time, suggesting lower cohesiveness, and were less decisive in their large-scale movement decisions. These results add to the growing body of literature on the downstream impacts of social disruption for elephants. Whilst the translocation of culling Orphans is no longer practised in South Africa, we encourage careful consideration of any elephant translocation and the resulting social disruption. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 3790 KiB  
Article
Let Us Give Voice to Local Farmers: Preferences for Farm-Based Strategies to Enhance Human–Elephant Coexistence in Africa
by María Montero Botey, Mario Soliño, Ramón Perea and María Martínez-Jauregui
Animals 2022, 12(14), 1867; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12141867 - 21 Jul 2022
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2879
Abstract
Local communities surrounding wildlife corridors and natural reserves often face challenges related to human–wildlife coexistence. To mitigate the challenges and ensure the long-term conservation of wildlife, it is important to engage local communities in the design of conservation strategies. By conducting 480 face-to-face [...] Read more.
Local communities surrounding wildlife corridors and natural reserves often face challenges related to human–wildlife coexistence. To mitigate the challenges and ensure the long-term conservation of wildlife, it is important to engage local communities in the design of conservation strategies. By conducting 480 face-to-face interviews in 30 villages along and adjacent to the Selous-Niassa Wildlife Corridor (Tanzania), we quantified farmers’ preferences for farm-based measures to mitigate African elephant damage using choice experiments. Results show that farmers considered no action the least preferred option, revealing that they are open to trying different measures. The most preferred management strategy matched with the preferences of wildlife rangers in the area, suggesting low concern about the potential conflicts between stakeholders. However, a latent class model suggests that there are significant differences among responses triggered by farmers’ previous experience with elephants, the intensity of the elephant damage, and the socioeconomic situation of the farmer. Results show a marked spatial distribution among respondents, highlighting the benefits of zone management as conflicts were found to be highly context dependent. Understanding the human dimension of conservation is essential for the successful planification and implementation of conservation strategies. Therefore, the development and broad utilization of methodologies to gather specific context information should be encouraged. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conservation Behavior Approaches to Elephant Management and Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-6
Back to TopTop