Article Sidebar
Article Details
Open access articles published in the Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology are under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) License which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The CC BY license permits commercial and non-commercial re-use of an open-access article, as long as the author is properly attributed.
Copyright on any research article published in the Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology is retained by the author(s). The authors grant the Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology with a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
Use of the article in whole or in part in any medium requires proper citation as follows:
Title of Article, Names of the Author, Year of Publication, Journal Title, Volume (Issue) and page. Links to the final article on the JSRE website are encouraged.
The Creative Commons Attribution License does not affect any other rights held by authors or third parties in the article, including without limitation the rights of privacy and publicity. Use of the article must not assert or imply, whether implicitly or explicitly, any connection with, endorsement or sponsorship of such use by the author, publisher or any other party associated with the article.
For any reuse or distribution, users must include the copyright notice and make clear to others that the article is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution license, linking to the relevant Creative Commons web page. Users may impose no restrictions on the use of the article other than those imposed by the Creative Commons Attribution license.
To the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, the article is made available as is and without representation or warranties of any kind whether express, implied, statutory or otherwise and including, without limitation, warranties of title, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement, absence of defects, accuracy, or the presence or absence of errors.
Main Article Content
Elephant movement and local community attitudes towards the proposed corridor between Thegu forest and Sangare ranch
Abstract
Rapid human population growth has drastically reduced elephant range by
reducing habitats and blocking traditional migration routes over the last several decades. Attempts to reopen migration routes have been met with mixed, albeit strong, reactions. A wider study to analyse human-elephant interactions in the area also sought the attitudes of local people towards re-opening migration between Mt Kenya forests and the nearby Sangare ranch. The route commonly traversed by elephants was mapped using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) techniques. Two elephant sightings, footprints, dung and residents’ accounts confirmed this as the only route currently used by elephants out of Mt Kenya forests. The footprints and dung were observed within a 4 -10 m wide strip along the entire 7 km stretch between Mt Kenya and Sangare. A questionnaire was administered to collect data on demography and impacts of elephants on adjacent farms, while the dung pile count technique was used to estimate elephant distribution and densities. Results showed that 33% of the community resented elephants, which was strongly associated with alleged levels of damage to lives and property (X2= 0.797, df =4, P < 0.01). This caused unwillingness to provide passage through their land, with only 2.6% of the respondents indicating they would let elephants on their property. About 42% of those against the corridor attributed this to damages and losses caused by elephants whereas 10.5 % did not give reasons. A majority of the respondents were aware of importance of elephants in tourism, as agents of seed
dispersal, sources of bush meat and ivory, and in revenue generation, but only a 3% admitted having gained in any way. The corridor seemed unviable under the prevailing land uses and negative public attitudes towards elephants.
Key words: Human-wildlife conflict, habitat fragmentation, migration
