01 Novembner, KATHMANDU : A new technology using artificial scents is being tested in Nepal to prevent tigers and leopards from entering human settlements and livestock areas. The aim is to influence the behavior of predatory animals by dispersing laboratory-created versions of chemical substances that wildlife use to mark their territory and communicate with each other, using small devices.
This research, a collaboration between Cornell University in the United States, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Nepal, and local forest authorities, is working on the concept of creating invisible boundaries using biological scents, known as ‘Bio-Boundaries’. Researchers began testing 10 chemical substances in October 2024 along the 13-kilometer (8-mile) long Khata Biological Corridor, which connects Bardia National Park in Nepal to the Katarniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary in India. Both centers where the substances were used and control centers were established for the test.
Researchers expect that this technology can prevent tigers and leopards from entering corrals where livestock are kept and other high-risk areas.
Do Scents Deter Tigers and Leopards?
During the research, at some test sites, tigers and leopards approached the scent-emitting devices, investigated them, and then turned back without crossing the boundary. However, not all chemical substances had the same effect. Of the 10 chemical substances tested, three were associated with a decrease in leopard presence, and two were found to reduce tiger presence. Some scents, conversely, attracted tigers and leopards. The animals’ response to the scents varied by species and location.
According to Deepak Adhikari, as mentioned on Mongabay Environment Online, Shashank Poudel, Head of Wildlife Programs at WWF Nepal, stated, ‘The animals would come to the source of the scent and investigate, but they did not cross the boundary they perceived.’ Poudel added that while some scents prompted animals to come closer and investigate, they did not proceed further.
However, other chemical substances yielded unexpected results. Due to such scents, tigers became more attracted to the area and started visiting repeatedly. ‘That was not our objective. Another chemical substance proved more effective in keeping leopards away,’ Poudel said.
Promising Results in Botswana, Yet to be Proven in Nepal
Previous research conducted in Botswana indicated that one chemical substance helped reduce leopard attacks. Following this, the testing of this technology began in Nepal as well.
However, the research conducted in Nepal has not yet replicated the results from Botswana. According to researchers, merely observing a tiger turning away from the scent source is not proof that the technology prevents attacks on livestock. While the scents may influence animal behavior, further study is needed to confirm whether they actually reduce human-wildlife conflict.
Can be Used in Corrals and Grazing Areas
If this technology proves effective, researchers expect that devices emitting scents could be installed around corrals, sheds where livestock are kept, and grazing areas. There is also potential for using such devices on livestock that go out to graze.
This could help keep tigers and leopards away from livestock. However, researchers consider this a supplementary measure, not a replacement for building secure corrals, monitoring livestock, and practicing safe herding methods.
Even if the technology is effective, there are challenges in its practical application. The cost of the devices, arrangements for regular scent replenishment, and the production and distribution system for the chemical substances are issues that still need to be resolved.
In Nepal, attacks on livestock in settlements near tiger and leopard habitats are one of the main causes of human-wildlife conflict. Such conflict affects the livelihoods of local communities and also poses challenges to wildlife conservation.
If the artificial scent-based ‘Bio-Boundary’ technology proves effective, it could become a new option for mitigating conflict between wildlife and local communities. However, based on the current mixed results, researchers state that it cannot yet be considered a proven method for conflict prevention.
+ There are no comments
Add yours