Back

Crop raiding as an emerging threat to giraffes: drivers and perceived effectiveness of countermeasures

Owino, R. O.; Golding, J.; Sangale, E. L.; Ali, A. H.; Alston, J. M.

2026-05-03 ecology
10.64898/2026.05.01.722334 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Giraffes, unlike other large mammals, typically pose minimal risk to humans, their animals, and crops, so they are traditionally not involved in human-wildlife conflict. Tree crops, however, are expanding across Africa, resulting in crop raiding by giraffes and retaliatory snaring, poaching, and killing of giraffes in response. The dynamics of giraffe crop raiding, however, are poorly understood, making effective interventions difficult to implement. To better understand key factors for humans and giraffes that mediate crop raiding, we used a multi-method approach to estimate giraffe abundance and activity, understand farmers perceptions and decisions, and test countermeasures around Garissa Giraffe Sanctuary in eastern Kenya. We hypothesized that 1) giraffe farm invasion would occur in dry seasons, 2) farms growing mangoes would be more likely to be invaded, 3) reducing invasion with only physical barriers would be less effective than adding behavior-based countermeasures, 4) perceptions would match giraffe activity and 5) countermeasure adoption would be driven by cost. We found that invasion and crop raiding primarily occur during the dry season and are associated with mangoes. Farmers are using many countermeasures. Effective countermeasures target giraffe behavior combined with physical barriers. Countermeasures are most effective when negative associations with humans are reinforced. Floodlights and speakers that play predator calls both reduce invasion, but only if used consistently. Overall, farmers perceptions matched giraffe dynamics. Availability was the most important factor in farmers willingness to try a countermeasure. Our results suggest that conflict can be reduced and there is interest from farmers in doing so, but use of countermeasures should be consistently applied and supported by making necessary equipment and instructions available.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 7%
21.9%
2
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.6%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 20%
6.2%
4
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
5
Journal of Applied Ecology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.1%
6
Frontiers in Veterinary Science
30 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
8
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.0%
9
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
10
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.5%
11
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 26%
2.5%
12
Preventive Veterinary Medicine
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.3%
13
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 36%
2.0%
14
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
15
One Health
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
16
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
17
Animal Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
18
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
19
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
20
Biodiversity and Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
21
Ecological Applications
28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
22
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.2%
23
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
24
Biotropica
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
25
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
27
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.6%