Cited by 32Wildlife Ecology and ConservationRangeland and Wildlife ManagementAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies

Management implications of new research on problem elephants

Open access
Hoare, Richard·2001·Pachyderm

Abstract

The persistance of problem elephant behaviour appears to continue, at least in some populations, even when identified culprit individuals are routinely removed from these populations over a long time. Is it possible that elephant populations, rather than having a few habitual problem animals, may have what could be termed a problem component? Neither translocation or killing of problem animals appears to work, others simply take their place. This implies that in such populations either translocation or killling of problem anaimls will have to continue indefinately. Although difficult to test this reasoning is supported by considerable circumstantial evidence and agrees with accepted principles in agricultural pest cntrol. Merely killing (removing) individuals of the pest species seldom has much impact of the problem, most pests are effectively controlled by denying them their target food or a nearby refuge.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.69649/pachyderm.v30i1.1037

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In elephant populations, not every animal enters into conflict with humans; there are often 'problem individuals' that regularly engage in negative interactions with humans while a large majority may stay inside a protected area and avoid human contact.

    “not every animal in a given elephant population enters into conflict with humans. Instead, there are often 'problem individuals' (Barrett et al., 2019; Hoare, 2001) that regularly engage in negative interactions with humans while a large majority of elephants within a particular population may stay inside a protected area and avoid human contact (Plotnik & Jacobson, 2022).”

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hoare, R.
Corresponding author
Hoare, Richard
Venue
Pachyderm
Published
2001-06-30
Volume
30
Pages
44-48
ISSN
1026-2881 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4404076872
Cited by
32
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pachyderm (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Keywords
translocation, population management, food availability, refuge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review