History and present status of human-elephant conflicts in the Mwatate-Bura area, Kenya

Abstract

The management of large mammals such as elephant, rhino, lion, and tiger often entails dealing with people related problems at the interface between protected areas and areas with other land uses. This thesis describes, examines, and evaluates the history, nature, and extent of human-elephant conflicts at the interface between Tsavo West National Park and adjacent human settlements. The implications of these relationships to traditional agriculture and rural social economics are then reviewed. The resultant attitudes and perceptions regarding conventional government approach to wildlife conservation and management, and the factors controlling them are then described. Limited comparisons of the attitudes and perceptions with those an adjacent area with no history of human-elephant conflicts are made. Data on history, nature and ext~nt ot"conflicts were collected using a questionnaire. Th~ same questionnaire provided a conceptual and methodological framework for investigating attitudes, perceptions, and awareness in both areas. Data on the current levels of crop damage by elephants were collected by, on the spot assessment of elephant crop damage throughout the growing season of food crops. Crop damage by many wild animals was widespread and the most significant negative effect that wild animals had on people in the lower zones of the Taita area of kenya. Elephants were the most significant, however, and also caused several other direct and indirect negative effects. Although they may not have always been the worst mammalian pests, elephants' perception by people as overwhelming beings to deal with, may have lead to their being perceived as the worst. Although conflicts between people and elephants had always occurred in the past, two previous events had greatly worsened the situation. First, the increased encroachment by subsistence cultivators on to land previously seen only as useful to livestock and wild life, and secondly the widespread poaching of elephants in national parks that made areas close to people relatively safer for the elephants. Attitudes toward wild animals in general, and this includes elephants were, contrary to popular assertions fairy favorable. These attitudes were, however, of a utilitarian nature and residents resented or had negative attitudes toward aspects of wildlife conservation they felt did not benefit them or those that made them incur losses. Perceptions concerning who benefits from contemporary wildlife conservation in the area were consistent with expectations under conventional centralized wild life conservation where ordinary people tend to distance themselves from any benefit accrued by governments. Although awareness on wildlife conservation was low among residents, attitudes were not free of its influence. This was not true of perceptions. Human food crops might just have been be the preferred food for elephants rather than a vital resource for use in bad times. These findings contribute to the understanding needed in conflict resolution at a time when the tide in wildlife management is in favor of unconventional and innovative ways of redressing conflicts between people and wild animals