Can Infrared Technology Save Wildlife? A Hopeful Perspective from an African Scrub
The time was 9 pm. A guy dressed in camouflage clothing crouched underneath a thick African scrub in the middle of a full moon night. He adjusted his green hat and positioned himself as a sample poacher for a volunteer walking on a track with an infrared camera.
“I see him here,” the volunteer yelled in excitement.
“Great! Now walk further until you’re sure about his location,” a fellow scientist said. He stood right next to the volunteer and recorded his observation on a sheet of paper.
“Ah! Yes. He’s right here. That red blob on the screen,” the volunteer replied taking a couple extra steps and spotting the hidden poacher on his infrared camera screen.
“Good job!” The scientist muttered. The exercise was officially over.
This was a scene from a 2014 research at the Mankwe Wildlife Reserve in South Africa. A team of scientists here was conducting an experiment to determine whether infrared imaging technology (IRT) can better help locate poachers at greater distances than conventional flashlights. The sample poacher and the volunteer were participants. And through this program, conservationists were trying to ascertain whether IRT could help them better fight wildlife crimes.
Poaching is a series threat to biodiversity. With its rise in different parts of the world, researchers over the last several years, have conducted dozens of experiments assessing the role of different technological applications in efficiently combating it. Take unmanned aerial vehicles for instance. Better referred to as UAVs or drones, these devices have been rigorously tested by scientists to patrol swathes of land largely unreachable on foot. They would fly over grasslands and forest canopies, transmit real-time video back to conservationists, and provide them with imagery concerning movement of different poaching gangs. The case for camera traps is also very similar. Mounted on tree trunks, these camera devices would often get activated by the movement of animals or people, and would take photos of poachers and wildlife within seconds. Similar to drones, camera traps have also been tested to assess their role in combatting poaching. In fact, they are already deployed today in countries like India, and Malaysia to help conservationists find evidence for the presence of illegal hunting in various protected areas. The same, in fact, is true for GPS installed over large animals, like elephants. Such devices have also been tried out. The success, however, for all tech equipment, has been limited. And they all have major drawbacks.
UAVs are expensive to procure and manage. Camera traps cannot stop poachers from killing wildlife. And devices planted on top of elephants pose major health risks to the animals involved. In essence, most technological applications available until this point have proven to demonstrate some major flaw. The case of infrared thermal imaging, however, seemed different.
Infrared thermal imaging devices, or IRTs, contain sensors that are sensitive to infrared wavelengths emitted by different wildlife. They remotely sense the temperature of animals, including humans, and use it to precisely predict their location through a camera display. Therefore, from surveying and monitoring mammals and birds, to detecting nocturnal and burrowing species, infrared technology has already discovered its use in several aspects of environmental research. To test their application on combating poaching, consequently, seemed like a rational idea to scientists at the Mankwe reserve.
Henceforth, in 2014, a group of volunteers were recruited to conduct an experiment. They were asked to walk thrice along a track using a flashlight, a cheap infrared imaging camera, and a more expensive IRT in a randomized order. Each volunteer was tasked to precisely predict the location of a sample poacher using all the three devices. They would walk on the track with each chosen device, report on first detection of the acting poacher hidden in the bush, and then report again after walking further until the location was precisely determined. The study was carried out using 27 volunteers and it concluded with results in favor of infrared imaging technology.
According to the experiment authors, while the average first detection distance for flashlight from the track was 37.3 m, the mean distance for lower price infrared imaging technology was 57.1 m. This improvement was further compounded by the more expensive IRTs. According to the research, the latter devices produced an average first detection distance of a whooping 68.3 m. Clearly, IRTs were far more effective than traditional flashlights in antipoaching patrolling, at least for Mankwe wildlife reserve.
The researchers concluded that infrared imaging technology was promising for antipoaching patrols, although they ought to be tested in the area in question before investments were made. They also observed that statistically, no significant difference between a cheaper and a more expensive IRT existed. Therefore, reserves with financial constraints could choose infrared devices ten times cheaper with nearly the same level of detection.
At a time when nature is engaged in a losing warfare, anything promising can help. With catastrophic biodiversity loss and a changing climate, we might as well be looking at an epoch that threatens the very survival of humankind. This study provides hope in an era where poaching stands at an all time high. With further research and development, it seems likely that technology might help better conserve the natural world — at least temporarily.
Sources
Gaworecki, M. (2016, August 13). Can camera traps help stop wildlife crime? Mongabay Environmental News. https://news.mongabay.com/2016/08/can-camera-traps-help-stop-wildlife-crime/
Hart, A. G., Rolfe, R. N., Dandy, S., Stubbs, H., MacTavish, D., MacTavish, L., & Goodenough, A. E. (2015). Can Handheld Thermal Imaging Technology Improve Detection of Poachers in African Bushveldt? PLOS ONE, 10(6), e0131584. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131584
