Attitudes towards the Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices to Manage Wild Elephant Movement
Article
Cabral de Mel, Surendranie J., Seneweera, Saman, Dangolla, Ashoka, Weerakoon, Devaka K., Maraseni, Tek and Allen, Benjamin L.. 2023. "Attitudes towards the Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices to Manage Wild Elephant Movement." Animals. 13 (16). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162657
| Article Title | Attitudes towards the Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices to Manage Wild Elephant Movement |
|---|---|
| ERA Journal ID | 200143 |
| Article Category | Article |
| Authors | Cabral de Mel, Surendranie J., Seneweera, Saman, Dangolla, Ashoka, Weerakoon, Devaka K., Maraseni, Tek and Allen, Benjamin L. |
| Journal Title | Animals |
| Journal Citation | 13 (16) |
| Article Number | 2657 |
| Number of Pages | 14 |
| Year | 2023 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG |
| Place of Publication | Switzerland |
| ISSN | 2076-2615 |
| Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162657 |
| Web Address (URL) | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/13/16/2657 |
| 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 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. © 2023 by the authors. |
| Keywords | conservation; electric shock collars; Elephas maximus; human-elephant conflict; public opinion; virtual fencing; wildlife management |
| Related Output | |
| Is part of | Efficacy and welfare of aversive geofencing devices for managing the movements of Asian elephants |
| ANZSRC Field of Research 2020 | 310901. Animal behaviour |
| Public Notes | This article is part of a UniSQ Thesis by publication. See Related Output. |
| Byline Affiliations | Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment |
| National Institute of Fundamental Studies, Sri Lanka | |
| University of Melbourne | |
| University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka | |
| University of Colombo, Sri Lanka | |
| Chinese Academy of Sciences, China | |
| Nelson Mandela University, South Africa | |
| Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment |
Permalink -
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/z2571/attitudes-towards-the-potential-use-of-aversive-geofencing-devices-to-manage-wild-elephant-movement
Download files
Published Version
| 2023c - Cabral de Mel etal -animals-AGDs attitudes.pdf | ||
| License: CC BY 4.0 | ||
| File access level: Anyone | ||
166
total views20
total downloads26
views this month0
downloads this month