Seasonal and spatial vulnerability to agricultural damage by elephants in the western Serengeti, Tanzania

Crop use structures resource selection strategies for African elephants in a human-dominated landscape

To conserve wide-ranging species in degraded landscapes, it is essential to understand how the behavior of animals changes in relation to the degree and composition of modification. Evidence suggests that large inter-individual variation exists in the propensity for use of degraded areas and may be driven by both behavioral and landscape factors. The use of cultivated lands by wildlife is of particular interest, given the importance of reducing human-wildlife conflicts and understanding how such areas can function as biodiversity buffers. African elephant space use can be highly influenced by human activity and the degree to which individuals crop-raid. We analyzed GPS data from 56 free-ranging elephants in the Serengeti-Mara Ecosystem using resource selection functions (RSFs) to assess how crop use may drive patterns of resource selection and space use within a population. We quantified drivers of similarity in resource selection across individuals using proximity analysis of individual RSF coefficients derived from random forest models. We found wide variation in RSF coefficient values between individuals indicating strongly differentiated resource selection strategies. Proximity assessment indicated the degree of crop use in the dry season, individual repeatability, and time spent in unprotected areas drove similarity in resource selection patterns. Crop selection was also spatially structured in relation to agricultural fragmentation. In areas with low fragmentation, elephants spent less time in crops and selected most strongly for crops further from protected area boundaries, but in areas of high fragmentation, elephants spent twice as much time in crops and selected most strongly for crops closer to the protected area boundary. Our results highlight how individual differences and landscape structure can shape use of agricultural landscapes. We discuss our findings in respect to the conservation challenges of human-elephant conflict and incorporating behavioral variation into human-wildlife coexistence efforts.

Conservation benefit-sharing mechanisms and their effectiveness in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem: local communities' perspectives

Benefit-sharing mechanisms have been instrumental in securing the support of local communities living on the edge of protected areas to implement protected area goals and enhance biodiversity conservation outcomes. Understanding the acceptability of the types of benefit provided among diverse communities is crucial for co-designing benefit-sharing approaches that accommodate local perspectives. Here, we used quasi-structured questionnaires and focus group discussions (FGD) to assess the acceptance of the types of benefit received by the communities in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem (GSE) in Tanzania and the effectiveness of the benefits in securing community support for conservation reserves. We found that the categories of social service provision, livelihood support, and employment described all the benefits provided across conservation institutions operating in the GSE. However, the types of benefit within these categories varied significantly among conservation institutions, in terms of level and frequency of benefits received by communities. Overall, student scholarships were highly rated by respondents as the most satisfying benefit received. Respondents who were dissatisfied with the benefits received thought that the benefits did not compensate for the high costs arising from wildlife incursions onto their land. Communities' acceptance of the benefits received varied greatly among villages, but only a small proportion of pooled respondents (22%) were willing to support the existence of a protected area without benefit. This study suggests that local people are willing to support conservation outcomes but require conservation institutions to give greater consideration to the costs incurred by communities, their livelihood needs, and access to natural resources or other benefits. We recommend that benefit-sharing be tailored to the local circumstances and cultures of people living close to protected areas, particularly communities expressing more negative views, to ensure adequate and appropriate compensation is provided.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10531-023-02583-1.

Crop diversity and susceptibility of crop fields to elephant raids in eastern Okavango Panhandle, northern Botswana

Elephants frequently raid crops within their ranges in Africa and Asia. These raids can greatly impact agricultural productivity and food security for farmers. Therefore, there is a need to explore cost‐effective measures that would reduce the susceptibility of crops and agricultural fields to elephant raiding, and further promote sustainable human–elephant coexistence. Previous studies have examined the susceptibility of crop fields to elephant raids using field characteristics such as field size and proximity to water sources. However, there are limited studies investigating how different crop types, individually and in their combinations, influence crop susceptibility to elephant raiding. This study utilized data collected from crop fields raided by the African savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana) between 2008 and 2018 in the eastern Okavango Panhandle, northern Botswana. Data on crops grown, number of crop‐raiding incidences for each crop, and elephant raiding incidences were recorded for each field assessed. Incidence risks (IR) and field risk value (RV) were computed using an adaptive epidemiological approach. The results showed that elephant raiding incidents varied significantly amongst crop types over space and time (p < .0001). Cereal crops (millet: Eleusine conaracana, maize: Zea mays) incurred a higher number of crop‐raiding incidents compared with leguminous crops (cowpea: Vigna unguiculata; groundnut: Arachis hypogea). Field RVs significantly varied depending on which crop was present in the field. There was a significant negative correlation between the number of crop types and the susceptibility of the field to raiding (r = −0.680, p < .0001). Our results suggest that the susceptibility of the fields to elephant raids could be minimized by selecting crop types and combinations less susceptible to elephant damage, thus enhancing food security for local subsistence farmers.

Who is adjusting to whom?: Differences in elephant diel activity in wildlife corridors across different human-modified landscapes

The global impact of increased human activities has consequences on the conservation of wildlife. Understanding how wildlife adapts to increased human pressures with urban expansion and agricultural areas is fundamental to future conservation plans of any species. However, there is a belief that large wild free-ranging carnivores and ungulates, cannot coexist with people, limited studies have looked at wildlife movements through differing human-dominated landscapes at finer spatial scales, in Africa. This information is vital as the human population is only going to increase and the wildlife protected areas decrease. We used remote-sensor camera traps to identify the movement patterns of African elephant (Loxodonta africana) through six wildlife corridors in Botswana. The wildlife corridors were located in two different human-dominated landscapes (agricultural/urban), with varying degrees of human impact. While we found that elephants use corridors in both landscapes, they use the urban corridors both diurnally and nocturnally in contrast to agricultural corridors which were only nocturnal. Our results provide evidence for temporal partitioning of corridor use by elephants. We identified that seasonality and landscape were important factors in determining the presence of elephants in the corridors. Our findings demonstrate that elephant diel patterns of use of the wildlife corridor differs based on the surrounding human land-uses on an hourly basis and daily basis, revealing potential adaptation and risk avoidance behaviour.

Risk perception and tolerance shape variation in agricultural use for a transboundary elephant population

To conserve wide-ranging species in human-modified landscapes, it is essential to understand how animals selectively use or avoid cultivated areas. Use of agriculture leads to human-wildlife conflict, but evidence suggests that individuals may differ in their tendency to be involved in conflict. This is particularly relevant to wild elephant populations. We analysed GPS data of 66 free-ranging elephants in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem to quantify their use of agriculture. We then examined factors influencing the level of agricultural use, individual change in use across years and differences in activity budgets associated with use. Using clustering methods, our data grouped into four agricultural use tactics: rare (<0.6% time in agriculture; 26% of population), sporadic (0.6%-3.8%; 34%), seasonal (3.9%-12.8%; 31%) and habitual (>12.8%; 9%). Sporadic and seasonal individuals represented two-thirds (67%) of recorded GPS fixes in agriculture, compared to 32% from habitual individuals. Increased agricultural use was associated with higher daily distance travelled and larger home range size, but not with age or sex. Individual tactic change was prevalent and the habitual tactic was maintained in consecutive years by only five elephants. Across tactics, individuals switched from diurnal to nocturnal activity during agricultural use, interpreted as representing similar risk perception of cultivated areas. Conversely, tactic choice appeared to be associated with differences in risk tolerance between individuals. Together, our results suggest that elephants are balancing the costs and benefits of crop usage at both fine (e.g. crop raid events) and long (e.g. yearly tactic change) temporal scales. The high proportion of sporadic and seasonal tactics also highlights the importance of mitigation strategies that address conflict arising from many animals, rather than targeted management of habitual crop raiders. Our approach can be applied to other species and systems to characterize individual variation in human resource use and inform mitigations for human-wildlife coexistence.

Rethinking assessment of success of mitigation strategies for elephant-induced crop damage

Crop damage is the most common impact of negative interactions between people and elephants and poses a significant threat to rural livelihoods and conservation efforts. Numerous approaches to mitigate and prevent crop damage have been implemented throughout Africa and Asia. Despite the documented high efficacy of many approaches, losses remain common, and in many areas, damage is intensifying. We examined the literature on effectiveness of crop-damage-mitigation strategies and identified key gaps in evaluations. We determined there is a need to better understand existing solutions within affected communities and to extend evaluations of effectiveness beyond measurement of efficacy to include rates of and barriers to adoption. We devised a conceptual framework for evaluating effectiveness that incorporates the need for increased emphasis on adoption and can be used to inform the design of future crop-damage mitigation assessments for elephants and conflict species more widely. The ability to prevent crop loss in practice is affected by both the efficacy of a given approach and rates of uptake among target users. We identified the primary factors that influence uptake as local attitudes, sustainability, and scalability and examined each of these factors in detail. We argue that even moderately efficacious interventions may make significant progress in preventing damage if widely employed and recommend that wherever possible scientists and practitioners engage with communities to build on and strengthen existing solutions and expertise. When new approaches are required, they should align with local attitudes and fit within limitations on labor, financial requirements, and technical capacity.