Volume 91, Issue 1 p. 112-123
RESEARCH ARTICLE

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

Nathan R. Hahn

Corresponding Author

Nathan R. Hahn

Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Correspondence

Nathan R. Hahn

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Jake Wall

Jake Wall

Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Mara Elephant Project, Narok, Kenya

Search for more papers by this author
Kristen Denninger-Snyder

Kristen Denninger-Snyder

Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Grumeti Fund, Mugumu-Serengeti, Tanzania

Search for more papers by this author
Marc Goss

Marc Goss

Mara Elephant Project, Narok, Kenya

Search for more papers by this author
Wilson Sairowua

Wilson Sairowua

Mara Elephant Project, Narok, Kenya

Search for more papers by this author
Noel Mbise

Noel Mbise

Grumeti Fund, Mugumu-Serengeti, Tanzania

Search for more papers by this author
Anna Bond Estes

Anna Bond Estes

Department of Environmental Studies, Carleton College, Northfield, MN, USA

School of Life Sciences and Bioengineering, The Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology, Arusha, Tanzania

Search for more papers by this author
Stephen Ndambuki

Stephen Ndambuki

Biodiversity Research and Monitoring, Kenya Wildlife Service, Nairobi, Kenya

Search for more papers by this author
Eblate Ernest Mjingo

Eblate Ernest Mjingo

Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha, Tanzania

Search for more papers by this author
Iain Douglas-Hamiliton

Iain Douglas-Hamiliton

Save the Elephants, Nairobi, Kenya

Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK

Search for more papers by this author
George Wittemyer

George Wittemyer

Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Save the Elephants, Nairobi, Kenya

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 02 November 2021
Citations: 5

Handling Editor: Allert Bijleveld

Abstract

  1. 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.
  2. 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%).
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare they have no conflict of interests.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Elephant tracking data will not be archived given their highly sensitive nature and high levels of poaching in the area. Summarized elephant data on agricultural use metrics, space use and tactic cluster results are available in the Dryad Digital Repository https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.rn8pk0pbn (Hahn et al., 2021). Interested readers can contact the authors directly for inquiries.

Journal list menu