Antipoaching standards in onshore hydrocarbon concessions drawn from a Central African case study

Unsustainable hunting outside protected areas is threatening tropical biodiversity worldwide and requires conservationists to engage increasingly in antipoaching activities. Following the example of ecocertified logging companies, we argue that other extractive industries managing large concessions should engage in antipoaching activities as part of their environmental management plans. Onshore hydrocarbon concessions should also adopt antipoaching protocols as a standard because they represent a biodiversity threat comparable to logging. We examined the spatiotemporal patterns of small‐ and large‐mammal poaching in an onshore oil concession in Gabon, Central Africa, with a Bayesian occupancy model based on signs of poaching collected from 2010 to 2015 on antipoaching patrols. Patrol locations were initially determined based on local intelligence and past patrol successes (adaptive management) and subsequently with a systematic sampling of the concession. We generated maps of poaching probability in the concession and determined the temporal trends of this threat over 5 years. The spatiotemporal patterns of large‐ and small‐mammal poaching differed throughout the concession, and likely these groups will need different management strategies. By elucidating the relationship between site‐specific sampling effort and detection probability, the Bayesian method allowed us to set goals for future antipoaching patrols. Our results indicate that a combination of systematic sampling and adaptive management data is necessary to infer spatiotemporal patterns with the statistical method we used. On the basis of our case study, we recommend hydrocarbon companies interested in implementing efficient antipoaching activities in their onshore concessions to lay the foundation of long‐needed industry standards by: adequately measuring antipoaching effort; mixing adaptive management and balanced sampling; setting goals for antipoaching effort; pairing patrols with large‐mammal monitoring; supporting antipoaching patrols across the landscape; restricting access to their concessions; performing random searches for bushmeat and mammal products at points of entry; controlling urban and agricultural expansion; supporting bushmeat alternatives; and supporting land‐use planning.     

Meta‐Analysis of Attitudes toward Damage‐Causing Mammalian Wildlife

Many populations of threatened mammals persist outside formally protected areas, and their survival depends on the willingness of communities to coexist with them. An understanding of the attitudes, and specifically the tolerance, of individuals and communities and the factors that determine these is therefore fundamental to designing strategies to alleviate human‐wildlife conflict. We conducted a meta‐analysis to identify factors that affected attitudes toward 4 groups of terrestrial mammals. Elephants (65%) elicited the most positive attitudes, followed by primates (55%), ungulates (53%), and carnivores (44%). Urban residents presented the most positive attitudes (80%), followed by commercial farmers (51%) and communal farmers (26%). A tolerance to damage index showed that human tolerance of ungulates and primates was proportional to the probability of experiencing damage while elephants elicited tolerance levels higher than anticipated and carnivores elicited tolerance levels lower than anticipated. Contrary to conventional wisdom, experiencing damage was not always the dominant factor determining attitudes. Communal farmers had a lower probability of being positive toward carnivores irrespective of probability of experiencing damage, while commercial farmers and urban residents were more likely to be positive toward carnivores irrespective of damage. Urban residents were more likely to be positive toward ungulates, elephants, and primates when probability of damage was low, but not when it was high. Commercial and communal farmers had a higher probability of being positive toward ungulates, primates, and elephants irrespective of probability of experiencing damage. Taxonomic bias may therefore be important. Identifying the distinct factors explaining these attitudes and the specific contexts in which they operate, inclusive of the species causing damage, will be essential for prioritizing conservation investments. Meta‐Análisis de las Posturas hacia la Mamíferos Silvestres Causantes de Daños     

Use of Acoustic Tools to Reveal Otherwise Cryptic Responses of Forest Elephants to Oil Exploration

Abstract: Most evaluations of the effects of human activities on wild animals have focused on estimating changes in abundance and distribution of threatened species; however, ecosystem disturbances also affect aspects of animal behavior such as short‐term movement, activity budgets, and reproduction. It may take a long time for changes in behavior to manifest as changes in abundance or distribution. Therefore, it is important to have methods with which to detect short‐term behavioral responses to human activity. We used continuous acoustic and seismic monitoring to evaluate the short‐term effects of seismic prospecting for oil on forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis) in Gabon, Central Africa. We monitored changes in elephant abundance and activity as a function of the frequency and intensity of acoustic and seismic signals from dynamite detonation and human activity. Elephants did not flee the area being explored; the relative number of elephants increased in a seasonal pattern typical of elsewhere in the ecosystem. In the exploration area, however, they became more nocturnal. Neither the intensity nor the frequency of dynamite blasts affected the frequency of calling or the daily pattern of elephant activity. Nevertheless, the shift of activity to nocturnal hours became more pronounced as human activity neared each monitored area of forest. This change in activity pattern and its likely causes would not have been detected through standard monitoring methods, which are not sensitive to behavioral changes over short time scales (e.g., dung transects, point counts) or cover a limited area (e.g., camera traps). Simultaneous acoustic monitoring of animal communication, human, and environmental sounds allows the documentation of short‐term behavioral changes in response to human disturbance.     

Reach and messages of the world's largest ivory burn

Recent increases in ivory poaching have depressed African elephant populations. Successful enforcement has led to ivory stockpiling. Stockpile destruction is becoming increasingly popular, and most destruction has occurred in the last 5 years. Ivory destruction is intended to send a strong message against ivory consumption, both in promoting a taboo on ivory use and catalyzing policy change. However, there has been no effort to establish the distribution and extent of media reporting on ivory destruction events globally. We analyzed media coverage of the largest ivory destruction event in history (Kenya, 30 April 2016) across 11 nation states connected to ivory trade. We used an online‐media crawling tool to search online media outlets and subjected 5 of the largest print newspapers (by circulation) in 5 nations of interest to content analysis. Most online news on the ivory burn came from the United States (81% of 1944 articles), whereas most of the print news articles came from Kenya (61% of 157 articles). Eighty‐six to 97% of all online articles reported the burn as a positive conservation action, whereas 4–50% discussed ivory burning as having a negative impact on elephant conservation. Most articles discussed law enforcement and trade bans as effective for elephant conservation. There was more relative search interest globally in the 2016 Kenyan ivory burn than any other burn in 5 years. Ours is the first attempt to track the reach of media coverage relative to an ivory burn and provides a case study in tracking the effects of a conservation‐marketing event.     

Beehive fences as a multidimensional conflict‐mitigation tool for farmers coexisting with elephants

Increasing habitat fragmentation and human population growth in Africa has resulted in an escalation in human–elephant conflict between small‐scale farmers and free‐ranging African elephants (Loxodonta Africana). In 2012 Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) implemented the national 10‐year Conservation and Management Strategy for the Elephant in Kenya, which includes an action aimed at testing whether beehive fences can be used to mitigate human–elephant conflict. From 2012 to 2015, we field‐tested the efficacy of beehive fences to protect 10 0.4‐ha farms next to Tsavo East National Park from elephants. We hung a series of beehives every 10 m around the boundary of each farm plot. The hives were linked with strong wire. After an initial pilot test with 2 farms, the remaining 8 of 10 beehive fences also contained 2‐dimensional dummy hives between real beehives to help reduce the cost of the fence. Each trial plot had a neighboring control plot of the same size within the same farm. Of the 131 beehives deployed 88% were occupied at least once during the 3.5‐year trial. Two hundred and fifty‐three elephants, predominantly 20–45 years old entered the community farming area, typically during the crop‐ ripening season. Eighty percent of the elephants that approached the trial farms were kept out of the areas protected by the beehive fences, and elephants that broke a fence were in smaller than average groups. Beehive fences not only kept large groups of elephants from invading the farmland plots but the farmers also benefited socially and financially from the sale of 228 kg of elephant‐friendly honey. As news of the success of the trial spread, a further 12 farmers requested to join the project, bringing the number of beehive fence protected farms to 22 and beehives to 297. This demonstrates positive adoption of beehive fences as a community mitigation tool. Understanding the response of elephants to the beehive fences, the seasonality of crop raiding and fence breaking, and the willingness of the community to engage with the mitigation method will help contribute to future management strategies for this high human–elephant conflict hotspot and other similar areas in Kenya.     

Wildlife impacts and vulnerable livelihoods in a transfrontier conservation landscape

Interactions between humans and wildlife resulting in negative impacts are among the most pressing conservation challenges globally. In regions of smallholder livestock and crop production, interactions with wildlife can compromise human well-being and motivate negative sentiment and retaliation toward wildlife, undermining conservation goals. Although impacts may be unavoidable when human and wildlife land use overlap, scant large-scale human data exist quantifying the direct costs of wildlife to livelihoods. In a landscape of global importance for wildlife conservation in southern Africa, we quantified costs for people living with wildlife through a fundamental measure of human well-being, food security, and we tested whether existing livelihood strategies buffer certain households against crop depredation by wildlife, predominantly elephants. To do this, we estimated Bayesian multilevel statistical models based on multicounty household data (n = 711) and interpreted model results in the context of spatial data from participatory land-use mapping. Reported crop depredation by wildlife was widespread. Over half of the sample households were affected and household food security was reduced significantly (odds ratio 0.37 [0.22, 0.63]). The most food insecure households relied on gathered food sources and welfare programs. In the event of crop depredation by wildlife, these 2 livelihood sources buffered or reduced harmful effects of depredation. The presence of buffering strategies suggests a targeted compensation strategy could benefit the region's most vulnerable people. Such strategies should be combined with dynamic and spatially explicit land-use planning that may reduce the frequency of negative human–wildlife impacts. Quantifying and mitigating the human costs from wildlife are necessary steps in working toward human–wildlife coexistence.     

Functional nonredundancy of elephants in a disturbed tropical forest

Conservation efforts are often motivated by the threat of global extinction. Yet if conservationists had more information suggesting that extirpation of individual species could lead to undesirable ecological effects, they might more frequently attempt to protect or restore such species across their ranges even if they were not globally endangered. Scientists have seldom measured or quantitatively predicted the functional consequences of species loss, even for large, extinction‐prone species that theory suggests should be functionally unique. We measured the contribution of Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) to the dispersal of 3 large‐fruited species in a disturbed tropical moist forest and predicted the extent to which alternative dispersers could compensate for elephants in their absence. We created an empirical probability model with data on frugivory and seed dispersal from Buxa Tiger Reserve, India. These data were used to estimate the proportion of seeds consumed by elephants and other frugivores that survive handling and density‐dependent processes (Janzen‐Connell effects and conspecific intradung competition) and germinate. Without compensation, the number of seeds dispersed and surviving density‐dependent effects decreased 26% (Artocarpus chaplasha), 42% (Careya arborea), and 72% (Dillenia indica) when elephants were absent from the ecosystem. Compensatory fruit removal by other animals substantially ameliorated these losses. For instance, reductions in successful dispersal of D. indica were as low as 23% when gaur (Bos gaurus) persisted, but median dispersal distance still declined from 30% (C. arborea) to 90% (A. chaplasha) without elephants. Our results support the theory that the largest animal species in an ecosystem have nonredundant ecological functionality and that their extirpation is likely to lead to the deterioration of ecosystem processes such as seed dispersal. This effect is likely accentuated by the overall defaunation of many tropical systems.