Department of Biology, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio, United States of America.
Bring the Elephant Home Foundation, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 1;13(6):e0194736. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194736. eCollection 2018.
Understanding human-wildlife conflict is an important first step in the conservation of highly endangered species that can have adverse effects on human communities, such as elephants. To gain insights into variables that shape attitudes toward elephant conservation in Asia, we surveyed 410 households and 46 plantation owners in seven villages around the Salakpra Wildlife Sanctuary in western Thailand, an area of high human-elephant conflict. We sought to evaluate how past experiences with elephants (positive or negative), as well as socio-economic variables (age, income level, gender, and employment type) affect attitudes toward elephant conservation and coexistence in this area. In addition, we quantified deterrence methods currently used and identify potential mitigation strategies supported by community members. In general, less supportive attitudes toward elephant conservation and coexistence were held by individuals older than 35 years of age, those who had previously had experienced negative interactions with elephants, those with lower incomes, and those working in the agricultural sector. Conversely, those who had received benefits from living near elephants (e.g., supplemental income or feelings of pride from hosting volunteers or participating in conservation work) had more supportive views of elephant coexistence. Plantation owners reported using a variety of deterrence methods with varying success, with firecrackers being the most commonly utilized method. Community members identified several potentially beneficial mitigation strategies including forest restorations and patrol teams, adding water sources to wild elephant habitat, and education of local school and community groups. Overall, our results highlight the value of community members receiving benefits from living near elephants and suggest that special incentives may be needed for demographic groups disproportionately affected by elephants (e.g. those at lower income levels, those working in agriculture). A combination of these and other approaches will be required if human-elephant coexistence in western Thailand is to be realized.
了解人兽冲突对于保护受到严重威胁的物种至关重要，这些物种可能会对人类社区产生负面影响，如大象。为了深入了解影响亚洲地区大象保护态度的变量，我们在泰国西部沙拉布野生动物保护区周边的 7 个村庄中对 410 户家庭和 46 位种植园主进行了调查，该地区人象冲突严重。我们试图评估过去与大象的互动经历（正面或负面）以及社会经济变量（年龄、收入水平、性别和就业类型）如何影响该地区人们对大象保护和共存的态度。此外，我们还量化了当前使用的威慑方法，并确定了社区成员支持的潜在缓解策略。总的来说，年龄在 35 岁以上、曾有过与大象负面互动经历、收入较低和从事农业部门工作的人对大象保护和共存的态度不太支持。相反，那些从与大象生活在一起中受益的人（例如，从接待志愿者或参与保护工作中获得额外收入或自豪感）对大象共存的看法更为支持。种植园主报告称，使用了多种威慑方法，但效果不一，其中最常用的方法是放鞭炮。社区成员确定了几种潜在的有益缓解策略，包括森林恢复和巡逻队、在野生大象栖息地增加水源，以及对当地学校和社区团体进行教育。总的来说，我们的研究结果强调了社区成员从与大象生活在一起中受益的价值，并表明对于受大象影响较大的人群（例如收入水平较低的人群、从事农业的人群）可能需要特殊激励措施。如果要实现泰国西部的人象共存，就需要结合这些方法和其他方法。
