[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (9)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = anti-poaching

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
13 pages, 1490 KiB  
Article
A Study on the Perception of African Elephant (Loxodonta africana) Conservation by School Children in Africa and England (UK)
by Katie E. Thompson and Genoveva F. Esteban
Diversity 2023, 15(6), 781; https://doi.org/10.3390/d15060781 - 16 Jun 2023
Viewed by 2523
Abstract
Environmental education (EE) applications can support wildlife conservation practices by improving school children’s understanding of environmental issues, including endangered species conservation, such as the African savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana). This study aimed to identify and assess school children’s perceptions of elephant conservation [...] Read more.
Environmental education (EE) applications can support wildlife conservation practices by improving school children’s understanding of environmental issues, including endangered species conservation, such as the African savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana). This study aimed to identify and assess school children’s perceptions of elephant conservation in three schools: South Africa, Kenya, and England. Questionnaires were completed by students at one school per location, with the age range of 10–16 (n = 364). The responses were then analysed independently and collectively using descriptive statistics (n = 364). School children feared elephants where elephants were native. The importance of elephants was not acknowledged by students in South Africa and England and included a lack of awareness of how elephants benefit other species. There was an unclear understanding of the threats to elephants. Collectively, a wildlife guide as a career choice was not highly valued. The results of this study have reflected key narratives of elephant conservation from selected countries; Kenya leading in anti-poaching and anti-trade campaigns, anti-poaching campaigns by various NGOs in the U.K., and elephant management around expanding populations in South Africa, which have given significant insights into areas of improvement for environmental education practices to support wildlife conservation globally. Furthermore, this new research has identified and compared school children’s awareness of elephant conservation on a greater spatial scale than what is currently understood, compounding the importance of understanding effective wildlife conservation in education. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Responses of why school children think elephants are important in each country. (<b>A</b>) = England, (<b>B</b>) = Kenya, (<b>C</b>) = South Africa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Explanations for the importance of elephants across all countries.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Categorical responses of fear of elephants for each gender and age group. Each graph represents a different country and gender: (<b>1A</b>,<b>1B</b>) = England, (<b>2A</b>,<b>2B</b>) = Kenya, (<b>3A</b>,<b>3B</b>) = South Africa; G = Girls, B = Boys.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The percentage split of the reasons why participants thought elephants were under threat out of the four selections (S) that were provided: S1: Loss of habitat from cutting down trees; S2: Killing elephants to sell their tusks; S3: Humans and elephants not being able to live together; S4: Too many different animal species in the same area. The level of importance is ranked from 1 to 4, where 1 is least important, and 4 is most important, which are split by country: E = England, K = Kenya, SA = South Africa.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Response values on a Likert-scale showing the importance of career choices per country: (<b>A</b>) = England, (<b>B</b>) = Kenya, (<b>C</b>) = South Africa.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 1240 KiB  
Article
Acoustic Monitoring Confirms Significant Poaching Pressure of European Turtle Doves (Streptopelia turtur) during Spring Migration across the Ionian Islands, Greece
by Christos Astaras, Zoi-Antigoni Sideri-Manoka, Manolia Vougioukalou, Despina Migli, Ioakim Vasiliadis, Sotirios Sidiropoulos, Christos Barboutis, Aris Manolopoulos, Michalis Vafeiadis and Savas Kazantzidis
Animals 2023, 13(4), 687; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13040687 - 16 Feb 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 3906
Abstract
The European turtle dove (Streptopelia turtur) is an Afro-Palearctic migrant whose populations have declined by 79% from 1980 to 2014. In 2018, the International Single Species Action Plan for the Turtle Dove (ISSAP) was developed with the goal of enabling, by [...] Read more.
The European turtle dove (Streptopelia turtur) is an Afro-Palearctic migrant whose populations have declined by 79% from 1980 to 2014. In 2018, the International Single Species Action Plan for the Turtle Dove (ISSAP) was developed with the goal of enabling, by 2028, an increase in turtle dove numbers along each of the three migration flyways (western, central, eastern). To achieve this, the illegal killing of turtle doves, a critical threat to the species, has to be eradicated. The Ionian Islands off the west coast of Greece lie on the eastern flyway and are considered a major turtle dove poaching hot-spot during spring migration. Quantifying wildlife crime, however, is challenging. In the absence of a reliable protocol for monitoring spring poaching levels, the agencies tasked with tackling the problem have no means of assessing the effectiveness of the anti-poaching measures and adapting them if required. Using passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) methods, we recorded gun hunting intensity at known turtle dove poaching sites during the 2019–2022 spring migrations (2–10 sites/season) with unprecedented spatial and temporal resolution. Based on published gunshot to killed/injured bird ratio for similar species (corroborated with discussions with local hunters) and an estimate of the proportion of hunting sites monitored by our PAM grid (using gunshot detection range estimates from control gunshots), we estimated that in 2021, up to 57,095 turtle doves were killed or injured across five Ionian Islands (Zakynthos, Paxi, Antipaxi, Othoni, and Mathraki). The 2022 estimate was almost half, but it is unclear as to whether the change is due to a decline in poachers or turtle doves. We propose ways of improving confidence in future estimates, and call for a temporary moratorium of autumn turtle dove hunting in Greece—as per ISSAP recommendation—until spring poaching is eradicated and the eastern flyway population shows signs of a full recovery. Finally, we hope our findings will pave the way for the development of PAM grids at turtle dove poaching hot-spots across all migration flyways, contributing to the global conservation of the species. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Birds)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location, name, and years of operation of the passive acoustic monitoring grid sensors in the Ionian Islands.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Daily variation in total poaching activity at the Keri and Vasilikos (Zakynthos Island) sites during the 2019 (23 April to 31 May) and 2020 (15 March to 31 May) spring migrations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Daily variation in the total poaching activity at nine sites during the 2021 and 2022 (15 March to 31 May) spring migrations. Data from the Kalipado (Zakynthos) acoustic sensor are not included for the sake of comparison, as that sensor malfunctioned in 2022. Almost all the gunshots in March were recorded at the Vasilikos (Zakynthos) site.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Weekly poaching pattern during the 2019–2022 spring migrations (n = 54,014).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Diel poaching pattern during the 2019–2022 spring migrations (n = 54,014). Data were only recorded from 7 am to 10 pm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Fitted logistic regression of the probability of a gunshot being detected using the DTD 1.5.6 gunshot detection algorithm with threshold 0.4, plotted as a function of the acoustic sensor’s (SWIFT rugged model) distance to the gunshot.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 2547 KiB  
Article
Using Trophy Hunting to Save Wildlife Foraging Resources: A Case Study from Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserves, Tanzania
by Nyangabo V. Musika, James V. Wakibara, Patrick A. Ndakidemi and Anna C. Treydte
Sustainability 2022, 14(3), 1288; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031288 - 24 Jan 2022
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 5151
Abstract
Globally, the role of trophy hunting in wildlife conservation has been a topic of much debate. While various studies have focused on the financial contribution of trophy hunting towards wildlife conservation, little is known about whether hunting activities can protect wildlife forage resources. [...] Read more.
Globally, the role of trophy hunting in wildlife conservation has been a topic of much debate. While various studies have focused on the financial contribution of trophy hunting towards wildlife conservation, little is known about whether hunting activities can protect wildlife forage resources. We examined the effect of illegal livestock grazing on wildlife habitat in operational and non-operational wildlife hunting blocks in Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserves (MKGR), Tanzania. We assessed whether the physical presence of hunting activities lowered illegal grazing and, thus, led to higher vegetation quality. We compared 324 samples of above-ground biomass (AGB) and grass cover between control (0.0007 cattle ha−1), moderately (0.02 cattle ha−1), and intensively (0.05 to 0.1 cattle ha−1) grazed hunting blocks. Likewise, we assessed soil infiltration, soil penetration, soil organic carbon (SOC), and soil Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium (N-P-K) across grazing intensity. Illegal grazing decreased AGB by 55%, grass cover by 36%, soil penetration by 46%, and infiltration rate by 63% compared to the control blocks. Illegal grazing further lowered SOC by 28% (F2,33 = 8, p < 0.002) but increased soil N by 50% (F2,33 = 32.2, p < 0.001) and soil K by 56% (H (2) = 23.9, p < 0.001), while soil P remained stable. We further examined if Hunting Company (HC) complements anti-poaching efforts in the Game Reserves (GR). We found that HC contributes an average of 347 worker-days−1 for patrol efforts, which is 49% more than the patrol efforts conducted by the GR. However, patrol success is higher for GR than HC (F1,21 = 116, p < 0.001), due to constant surveillance by HC, illegal herders avoided invading their hunting blocks. We conclude that illegal grazing severely reduced vegetation and soil quality in MKGR. We further claim that trophy hunting contributes directly to wildlife habitat preservation by deploying constant surveillance and preventing illegal grazing. We propose maintaining trophy hunting as an essential ecological tool in wildlife conservation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>A</b>) Location of Tanzania within Africa, (<b>B</b>) Location of study site within Tanzania, (<b>C</b>) A map of Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserve showing the study areas with wildlife hunting blocks of different grazing intensities, i.e., the diamond shape (♦) indicates a hunting block with little or no livestock grazing = control, the round shape (●) indicates a hunting block which is moderately grazed = moderate, and the triangle shape (▲) indicates a hunting block that is intensively grazed = intensive. The hunting blocks were laid out and visited in the sampling periods of July 2019, October 2019, and July 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Boxplots of above-ground grass biomass (<b>A</b>) and cover (<b>B</b>) across different grazing intensities and sampling periods in an operational wildlife hunting block with little or no livestock grazing (Control), a non-operational wildlife hunting block, which was moderately grazed (Moderate), and a hunting block, which was intensively grazed (Intensive). Boxplots indicate the mean (× within boxes), boxes range from the 25% to 75% quartile, and the end of the whiskers show the 5th and 95th percentiles. Different small letters denote statistically significant differences across treatments by Tukey’s HSD test at <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.05.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Boxplot of soil penetration capacity (<b>A</b>) and soil infiltration rate (<b>B</b>) across different grazing intensity and sampling periods in operational wildlife hunting blocks with little or no livestock grazing (Control), non-operational wildlife hunting blocks that were moderately grazed (Moderate), and hunting block that was intensively grazed (Intensive). Boxplots indicate the mean (the × within boxes), ranges from 25% to 75% quartile, and the whiskers’ tips indicate the 5th and 95th percentiles. Different small letters denote statistically significant differences among treatments by Tukey’s HSD test at <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.05.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Mean (±SE) of available Soil Organic Carbon (<b>A</b>), Soil Total Nitrogen (<b>B</b>), Soil Phosphorus (<b>C</b>), and Soil Potassium (<b>D</b>) sampled from an operational wildlife hunting block without illegal livestock grazing (Control), non-operational blocks with moderate (Moderate), and intensive livestock grazing (Intensive). Different letters denote significant differences across hunting blocks with varying grazing intensities according to the post-hoc test at <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.05.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Correlation between (<b>A</b>) grass cover and soil penetration, (<b>B</b>) grass biomass and soil penetration, (<b>C</b>) grass cover and soil infiltration, and (<b>D</b>) grass biomass and soil infiltration in the Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserve. N = 324 collected across three sampling periods of July 2019, October 2019, and July 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>A</b>) is the mean (±SE) patrol efforts and patrol success of Game Reserves (GR) and Hunting Company (HC). Different letters denote significant differences in patrol efforts and success across GR and HC at <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.05. (<b>B</b>) is the mean (±SE) patrol efforts and success by Game Reserve during the dry and wet season (GRD, GRW) and patrol efforts and success by Hunting Company during the dry and wet season (HCD, HCW), respectively. The solid line (▬) represents patrol efforts, and the dashed line (<b>….</b>) represents patrol success. The numbers represent the mean patrol efforts and success.</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 1465 KiB  
Article
Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Increasing Illegal Livestock Grazing over Three Decades at Moyowosi Kigosi Game Reserve, Tanzania
by Nyangabo V. Musika, James V. Wakibara, Patrick A. Ndakidemi and Anna C. Treydte
Land 2021, 10(12), 1325; https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121325 - 2 Dec 2021
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3214
Abstract
The global increase of livestock has caused illegal intrusion of livestock into protected areas. Until now, hotspot areas of illegal grazing have rarely been mapped, long-term monitoring data are missing, and little is known about the drivers of illegal grazing. We localized hotspots [...] Read more.
The global increase of livestock has caused illegal intrusion of livestock into protected areas. Until now, hotspot areas of illegal grazing have rarely been mapped, long-term monitoring data are missing, and little is known about the drivers of illegal grazing. We localized hotspots of illegal grazing and identified factors that influenced spatio-temporal patterns of illegal grazing over three decades in the Moyowosi Kigosi Game Reserve (MKGR), Tanzania. We used questionnaires with local pastoralists (N = 159), georeferenced aerial survey data and ranger reports from 1990–2019 to understand the reasons for illegal grazing in the area. We found that hotspots of illegal grazing occurred initially within 0–20 km of the boundary (H (3) = 137, p < 0.001; (H (3) = 32, p < 0.001) and encroached further into the protected area with time (H (3) = 11.3, p = 0.010); (H (2) = 59.0, p < 0.001). Further, livestock herd sizes decreased with increasing distance from the boundary (R = −0.20, p = 0.020; R = −0.40, p = 0.010). Most interviewees (81%) claimed that they face challenges of reduced foraging land in the wet season, caused by increasing land used for cultivation, which drives them into the MKGR to feed their livestock. We conclude that there is spatio-temporal consistency in the illegal livestock intrusion over three decades, and hotspot areas are located along the boundary of the MKGR. We suggest focusing patrols at these hotspot areas, especially during the wet season, to use limited law enforcement resources effectively. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The four districts around the MKGR that are mainly affecting the reserve through illegal grazing. Locations of interviews taken in 2019 at the four different villages shown (Chagu in Uvinza district, Ugansa in Kaliua district, Kagerankanda in Kasulu district and Nyaruranga in Kibondo districts; N = 159). (<b>A</b>) The map of Tanzania displaying the Moyowosi Kigosi Game Reserve (MKGR) in the Western (<b>B</b>) The mapa of MKGR displaying the four districts where interview took place, i.e., Uvinza, Kaliua, Kasulu and Kibondo districts (<b>C</b>) The four villages where interviews were taken (Chagu in Uvinza district, Ugansa in Kaliua district, Kagerankanda in Kasulu district and Nyaruranga in Kibondo districts).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatio-temporal patterns of incidents of illegal grazing in Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserve between the years 1990 and 2019. (<b>A</b>) Spatio-temporal pattern of illegal grazing in the years 1990–1998, (<b>B</b>) for the years 2000–2003, (<b>C</b>) for the years 2006–2014 and (<b>D</b>) for the years 2017–2019. (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) Spatial data from the survey report and (<b>D</b>) spatial data from the rangers’ report. The colours of circles represent the number of livestock individuals per herd.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Average (±SE) distances from the reserve boundary into the reserve of locations where illegal livestock intrusion was encountered. Distances are shown as km away from the boundary of Moyowosi—Kigosi Game Reserve (MKGR) into the reserve (<b>A</b>) for the years 1990–1998, 2000–2003 and 2006–2014 for survey data and (<b>B</b>) for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019 based on ranger report data. Different small letters denote statistically significant differences across year categories by Gomes Howell test at <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.05.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Correlation between the distance from the reserve’s boundary into the reserve (distance in km) and the number of individuals’ livestock per herd based on (<b>A</b>) data taken during the aerial survey for the years 1990–1998, 2000–2003 and 2006–2014 and (<b>B</b>) data from ranger reports for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 3984 KiB  
Article
An Evaluation of the Factors Affecting ‘Poacher’ Detection with Drones and the Efficacy of Machine-Learning for Detection
by Katie E. Doull, Carl Chalmers, Paul Fergus, Steve Longmore, Alex K. Piel and Serge A. Wich
Sensors 2021, 21(12), 4074; https://doi.org/10.3390/s21124074 - 13 Jun 2021
Cited by 17 | Viewed by 5706
Abstract
Drones are being increasingly used in conservation to tackle the illegal poaching of animals. An important aspect of using drones for this purpose is establishing the technological and the environmental factors that increase the chances of success when detecting poachers. Recent studies focused [...] Read more.
Drones are being increasingly used in conservation to tackle the illegal poaching of animals. An important aspect of using drones for this purpose is establishing the technological and the environmental factors that increase the chances of success when detecting poachers. Recent studies focused on investigating these factors, and this research builds upon this as well as exploring the efficacy of machine-learning for automated detection. In an experimental setting with voluntary test subjects, various factors were tested for their effect on detection probability: camera type (visible spectrum, RGB, and thermal infrared, TIR), time of day, camera angle, canopy density, and walking/stationary test subjects. The drone footage was analysed both manually by volunteers and through automated detection software. A generalised linear model with a logit link function was used to statistically analyse the data for both types of analysis. The findings concluded that using a TIR camera improved detection probability, particularly at dawn and with a 90° camera angle. An oblique angle was more effective during RGB flights, and walking/stationary test subjects did not influence detection with both cameras. Probability of detection decreased with increasing vegetation cover. Machine-learning software had a successful detection probability of 0.558, however, it produced nearly five times more false positives than manual analysis. Manual analysis, however, produced 2.5 times more false negatives than automated detection. Despite manual analysis producing more true positive detections than automated detection in this study, the automated software gives promising, successful results, and the advantages of automated methods over manual analysis make it a promising tool with the potential to be successfully incorporated into anti-poaching strategies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensors and Artificial Intelligence for Wildlife Conservation)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Scatterplot showing the relationship between increasing canopy density and probability of detection for TIR images with manual detection.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Scatterplot showing the relationship between increasing canopy density and probability of detection for RGB images with manual detection.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Scatterplots showing the relationship between increasing canopy density and probability of detection for both camera angles with manual detection. (<b>A</b>) Canopy vs. 90° camera angle for TIR data, (<b>B</b>) canopy vs. 90° camera angle for RGB data, (<b>C</b>) canopy vs. 45° angle for TIR data, (<b>D</b>) canopy vs. 45° angle for RGB data. The x axes for (<b>A</b>) and (<b>B</b>) (90° angle) and (<b>C</b>) and (<b>D</b>) (45° angle) are in opposite directions to represent the direction the test subject walked from point to point.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatterplot showing the relationship between increasing canopy density and probability of detection for TIR images with automated detection.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Scatterplot showing the relationship between increasing canopy density and probability of detection for RGB images with automated detection.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Diagram of the study site and the example locations. The white measuring tape indicates the boundaries of the study site (30 × 30 m). The different coloured spots represent the different sequences of locations. The arrows indicate where the test subject was instructed to walk; they then repeated this same walk backwards.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Thermal images showing the false positives caused by hot ground (top) and hot rocks (bottom). The red squares indicate the false positives.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>Thermal images showing the false positives caused by hot ground and rocks. The red arrows indicate the false positives.</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>Comparison between thermal (top) and RGB images (bottom) at an oblique angle. Both images were taken in the same area and with the test subject in the same location. The red square indicates the location of the test subject.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 277 KiB  
Article
Chinese Resident Preferences for African Elephant Conservation: Choice Experiment
by Shuokai Wang, Zhen Cai, Yuxuan Hu, Giuseppe T. Cirella and Yi Xie
Diversity 2020, 12(12), 453; https://doi.org/10.3390/d12120453 - 28 Nov 2020
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 2945
Abstract
Despite passionate efforts to preserve African elephants worldwide, their numbers continue to decline. Some conservation programs have suspended operations because the funds provided by various governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) cannot cover the enormous expenses of countering poaching, habitat destruction, and illegal ivory [...] Read more.
Despite passionate efforts to preserve African elephants worldwide, their numbers continue to decline. Some conservation programs have suspended operations because the funds provided by various governmental and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) cannot cover the enormous expenses of countering poaching, habitat destruction, and illegal ivory trading. This study investigates Chinese resident preferences for African elephant conservation using a choice experiment model. Results indicated that two-thirds of our 442 respondents with relatively higher education and income levels were willing to donate to conserve African elephants. Respondents were willing to donate RMB 1593.80 (USD 231.65) annually to African elephant conservation. Chinese residents were willing to donate the most to anti-poaching RMB 641.25 (USD 93.20), followed by enhancing habitat quality RMB 359.07 (USD 52.22), combating the illegal trade in ivory RMB 355.63 (USD 51.69), and alleviating human–elephant conflicts RMB 237.85 (USD 34.57). Our results suggest that accepting public donations could be an efficient way for NGOs to better preserve African elephants. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Biodiversity Conservation)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">
11 pages, 1101 KiB  
Article
People’s Knowledge of Illegal Chinese Pangolin Trade Routes in Central Nepal
by Sandhya Sharma, Hari Prasad Sharma, Hem Bahadur Katuwal, Chanda Chaulagain and Jerrold L. Belant
Sustainability 2020, 12(12), 4900; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124900 - 16 Jun 2020
Cited by 13 | Viewed by 5626
Abstract
Chinese pangolin populations are declining globally due to illegal wildlife trades in its range countries, especially China and Vietnam, where the largest markets for this species exist. Identifying the trade routes is crucial for developing conservation plans for the pangolin and understanding the [...] Read more.
Chinese pangolin populations are declining globally due to illegal wildlife trades in its range countries, especially China and Vietnam, where the largest markets for this species exist. Identifying the trade routes is crucial for developing conservation plans for the pangolin and understanding the attributes of the individuals involved in the illegal trade. We aimed to identify local trade routes and the socio-economic status of people involved in pangolin trades from the Gaurishankar Conservation Area [a Protected Area (PA)] and the Ramechhap district [a non-Protected Area (non-PA)] of Nepal. We found that pangolin traders were typically poor, illiterate, unemployed, male, and of working age (17–40 years old). Confiscation rates of pangolin parts were higher in non-PAs than Pas as the illegal trade routes seemed to differ between the PAs and non-PAs. From 2014 to 2018, the prices of pangolin scales in PAs and non-PAs increased by 50% and 67%, respectively. Our results highlight locals facilitating the trade of pangolins, therefore we recommend the need for other income generating sources such as ecotourism or providing incentives to promote local industries as well as to establish Community Based Anti-Poaching Units among range countries and trade route countries to control the trade of this globally threatened species. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Conservation: A Sustainability Perspective)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Locations of households (circles) surveyed in central Nepal to characterize the trade of the Chinese pangolin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Members of various ethnic groups who were involved in illegal pangolin trades in central Nepal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Illegal trade routes for Chinese pangolins and their parts in protected and non-protected areas in central Nepal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Chinese pangolin scales’ price per kg. The price was based on the seized samples between 2014 and 2018.</p>
Full article ">
27 pages, 6047 KiB  
Article
Poaching Detection Technologies—A Survey
by Jacob Kamminga, Eyuel Ayele, Nirvana Meratnia and Paul Havinga
Sensors 2018, 18(5), 1474; https://doi.org/10.3390/s18051474 - 8 May 2018
Cited by 49 | Viewed by 17257
Abstract
Between 1960 and 1990, 95% of the black rhino population in the world was killed. In South Africa, a rhino was killed every 8 h for its horn throughout 2016. Wild animals, rhinos and elephants, in particular, are facing an ever increasing poaching [...] Read more.
Between 1960 and 1990, 95% of the black rhino population in the world was killed. In South Africa, a rhino was killed every 8 h for its horn throughout 2016. Wild animals, rhinos and elephants, in particular, are facing an ever increasing poaching crisis. In this paper, we review poaching detection technologies that aim to save endangered species from extinction. We present requirements for effective poacher detection and identify research challenges through the survey. We describe poaching detection technologies in four domains: perimeter based, ground based, aerial based, and animal tagging based technologies. Moreover, we discuss the different types of sensor technologies that are used in intruder detection systems such as: radar, magnetic, acoustic, optic, infrared and thermal, radio frequency, motion, seismic, chemical, and animal sentinels. The ultimate long-term solution for the poaching crisis is to remove the drivers of demand by educating people in demanding countries and raising awareness of the poaching crisis. Until prevention of poaching takes effect, there will be a continuous urgent need for new (combined) approaches that take up the research challenges and provide better protection against poaching in wildlife areas. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Sensor Networks)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>White Rhinoceros and African Elephants in their natural habitats.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Number of poached rhinos in South Africa, adopted from the data published by the South African Department of Environmental Affairs (2017) [<a href="#B2-sensors-18-01474" class="html-bibr">2</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Anti-poaching methodology.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The camera component implanted in the front lobe of the rhino’s horn [<a href="#B34-sensors-18-01474" class="html-bibr">34</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>A snapshot of dyeing and removal of the rhino’s horn in an attempt to stop poaching. The horn is poisoned with chemical to make the horn useless to consume [<a href="#B98-sensors-18-01474" class="html-bibr">98</a>].</p>
Full article ">
6411 KiB  
Article
Towards an Autonomous Vision-Based Unmanned Aerial System against Wildlife Poachers
by Miguel A. Olivares-Mendez, Changhong Fu, Philippe Ludivig, Tegawendé F. Bissyandé, Somasundar Kannan, Maciej Zurad, Arun Annaiyan, Holger Voos and Pascual Campoy
Sensors 2015, 15(12), 31362-31391; https://doi.org/10.3390/s151229861 - 12 Dec 2015
Cited by 93 | Viewed by 14870
Abstract
Poaching is an illegal activity that remains out of control in many countries. Based on the 2014 report of the United Nations and Interpol, the illegal trade of global wildlife and natural resources amounts to nearly $ 213 billion every year, which is [...] Read more.
Poaching is an illegal activity that remains out of control in many countries. Based on the 2014 report of the United Nations and Interpol, the illegal trade of global wildlife and natural resources amounts to nearly $ 213 billion every year, which is even helping to fund armed conflicts. Poaching activities around the world are further pushing many animal species on the brink of extinction. Unfortunately, the traditional methods to fight against poachers are not enough, hence the new demands for more efficient approaches. In this context, the use of new technologies on sensors and algorithms, as well as aerial platforms is crucial to face the high increase of poaching activities in the last few years. Our work is focused on the use of vision sensors on UAVs for the detection and tracking of animals and poachers, as well as the use of such sensors to control quadrotors during autonomous vehicle following and autonomous landing. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue UAV Sensors for Environmental Monitoring)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The PCA subspace-based tracking of a 3D rhino in our work, where each rhino image is re-sized to 32 × 32 pixels, and the reconstructed rhino image is constructed using the eigenbasis. Moreover, the eigenbasis images are sorted based on their according eigenvalues.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The dynamic model of visual rhino tracking.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Our adaptive visual tracker for 3D animal tracking. The <span class="html-italic">k</span>-th frame is downsampled to create the multi-resolution structure (middle). In the motion model propagation, lower resolution textures are also initially used to reject the majority of samples at relatively low cost, leaving a relatively small number of samples to be processed at higher resolutions. The IPSL<math display="inline"> <msup> <mrow/> <mi>p</mi> </msup> </math> represents the incremental PCA subspace learning-based (IPSL) tracker in the <span class="html-italic">p</span>-th level of the pyramid.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Reference rectangle of the ground truth. The reference rectangle has included all of the pixels of the tracked animal, and the pink points are key pixels for locating the reference rectangle.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Visual rhino tracking. The red rectangle shows the estimated location of the running rhino.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Visual rhino tracking.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Visual elephant tracking.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Visual elephant tracking.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Integral image features used in boosting cascade face detections.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Total set of features used by the OpenCV detection.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Example of features. (<b>a</b>) the nose-bridge tends to be brighter than the eyes; (<b>b</b>) the forehead being brighter than the eye region below.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>AscTec Firefly with the mounted uEye camera.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Shadow example: The detection is stable even during faster movement of the drone.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Direct sunlight example: note the detection of the person standing in the shadow.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Fly-over example.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Final design of the variables of the fuzzy controller after the manual tuning process in the virtual environment (V-REP).</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Youbot platform with the ArUco target.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Evolution of the error of the lateral, longitudinal, vertical and heading controllers on the first moving target-following experiment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Evolution of the error of the lateral, longitudinal, vertical and heading controllers on the second moving target-following experiment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Evolution of the error of the lateral, longitudinal, vertical and heading controllers on the second autonomous landing on a moving target experiment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Evolution of the error of the lateral, longitudinal, vertical and heading controllers on the third autonomous landing on a moving target experiment.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop