Not just species but technologies can be invasive too

From the newsletter

A new study by Oxford University and Kenyan NGO Save the Elephants shows drones can watch elephants without causing stress to the large mammals. The species is very sensitive to the airborne noise including bees. But apparently they can get used to careful drone flights and let scientists study their social life if done right. 

• Non-invasive drone monitoring has broad potential in conservation where it is adapted and deployed for observation of  vulnerable species like rhinos and lions.

• Non-invasive technology is the alternative to noisy tools, bright lights, and engine-powered technology that causes disturbance.

More details

• The study, titled Elephant habituation to drones as a behavioural observation tool, tested 35 drone flights on 14 elephant groups in Samburu and Buffalo Springs, both in Kenya. Researchers flew the drones at 120 metres and launched over 500 metres downwind. The design allowed scientists to document elephant responses under real field conditions while gathering high-resolution behaviour and movement data.

• The results show disturbance dropped sharply with exposure. On average, 10.95% of elephants reacted in the first minute, falling to 1.39% by the last minute, while disturbed behaviour reduced from 9.46% in first trials to 3.23% in repeated trials. This pattern of rapid habituation demonstrates that carefully operated drones can act as low-intrusion monitoring tools in conservation landscapes.

• For conservation data systems, multi-sensor drones offer optical zoom and a wide field of view. This allows researchers to observe individuals and whole groups without entering sensitive terrain. Integrating drone footage into monitoring programmes gives conservation teams richer environmental datasets that help track habitat use and long-term population trends of both animal and plant species.

• The study also shows why standard operating procedures must be built into drone use. Disturbance levels changed depending on altitude and flight predictability, meaning weak protocols can distort feeding or movement data. Conservation programmes adopting drones will need clear, repeatable methods to ensure data quality. This will reduce bias and maintain ethical wildlife-monitoring standards.

• Drones offer powerful and low-intrusion monitoring, but the study warns they cannot replace other tools. They miss physiological stress and so they can distort baselines and cannot provide long, continuous data like collars or camera traps. For conservation decisions needing multi-season evidence for example the health of wildlife, drones must complement ground observations and other established monitoring systems.

Our take

• Non-invasive technology offers a rare opportunity to balance human research needs with animal welfare. 

• Conservationists should invest more in these tools to ensure accuracy of data collected as well as ethical conservation.