Drive wild animals away using domestic animals of the same species to reduce human-wildlife conflict

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

0%
Certainty

20%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Domestic mammals may be used in attempts to repel wild mammals of the same species that are causing nuisance, such as be crop-raiding. This intervention is likely to be especially relevant where the wild animal presents a potential threat to people such that simply chasing animals away may not always be a viable or effective option. If the intervention is effective, this could reduce incentives for carrying out lethal control of the focal species.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects of using domestic animals to drive away wild mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in India.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (1 STUDY)

Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One study in India found that using domestic elephants to drive wild Asian elephants away from villages did not reduce the probability of elephants damaging crops.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A study in 2006–2009, in two areas of Assam, India (Davies et al. 2011) found that using domestic elephants to drive wild Asian elephants Elephas maximus away from villages did not reduce the probability of elephants damaging crops. The chance of crop damage occurring was not lower when domestic elephants were used to deter crop-raiding wild elephants, in comparison with a range of other interventions or no intervention (results presented as statistical model coefficients). Within two study areas, 33 community members trained as monitors recorded 1,761 crop-raiding incidents, from 1 March 2006 to 28 February 2009. A range of deterrence methods was used, singly or in combination, including using domesticated elephants to repel wild elephants, chili smoke (from burning dried chilies, tobacco, and straw), spotlights, two-strand electric fences, chili fencing (engine grease and ground chili paste, on a jute or coconut rope), fire and noise.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Davies T.E., Wilson S., Hazarika N., Chakrabarty J., Das D., Hodgson D.J. & Zimmermann A. (2011) Effectiveness of intervention methods against crop-raiding elephants. Conservation Letters, 4, 346-354.

Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Use scent to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	3	Synopsis Link
Dispose of livestock carcasses to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Use repellents that smell bad (‘area repellents’) to deter crop or property damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link