VN October 2023

Oktober 2023 19 resulting in the paradigm of epidemiological under-ascertainment [174]. Remote or non-proximal engagement between humans and elephants under entirely natural conditions likely represents very low zoonotic and reverse zoonotic infection risks; however, close contact between humans and elephants under artificial captive conditions should be avoided, due to known pathological concerns. Even within the most regulated and professional situations, such as during veterinary management, zoos, and highly credible rehabilitation centers, elephants and people continue to cross infect, regardless of high-level knowledge bases and comprehensive prevention and control protocols. Therefore, other close contact experiences between elephants and humans as part of lower regulated activities, such as those pertinent to the tourism industry, cannot be reasonably expected to manage infection risks well at the elephant-human interface, arguably creating an unredeemable and indefensible public health situation. Elephant welfare within some sectors of the close contact interactive tourism industry manifestly has involved and continues to involve, significant abuse, both incidental deprivation and inhumane treatment, and deliberately brutal abuse. Such mistreatment and abuse constitute major standalone concerns but also have potential ramifications in causal links with public health and safety risks. Strong, evidence-based guidance for improved welfare is always welcome, but given the ongoing nature of abuses outlined previously, the essential welfare mindset required to conscientiously impose improvements would appear somewhat lacking. In addition, there are long-standing and somewhat complex and negatively evolving attitudes among mahouts toward elephants [6, 8], and such issues are probably traditionally ingrained and resistant to change. It may be overly optimistic to anticipate realworld improvement in elephant welfare without strong incentives and consequences for violations. There may be no rapid resolution to elephant welfare issues in currently permissive systems, and long-term re-education of mahout handlers and others may be required where elephant tourismpersists. Elephant welfare can feature strongly among tourists [168, 169], and in current scientific recommendations, which include regular monitoring of physical behavioral and psychological states for elephants and human-elephant interactions [9]. Comprehensive animal welfare strategies are essential, but while poor welfare exacerbates public health risks, good welfare does not imply a major reduction of such risks. However, pressure aimed at incentivizing welfare (or disincentivizing abuse) can be urgently applied by multiparty, cross-sector, actors adopting messaging that infers immediate financial loss for failures among those at any link in the chain of elephant tourism promotion or performance. For example, live-feed digital cameras have been successfully used to stream images for studying animal behavior 24/7 at zoos and universities [175], as well as to survey human handling, stunning, and slaughter of farmed animals in abattoirs [176]. Legal bans have been applied to many situations in which free-ranging wildlife is threatened by anthropogenic activities, and this approach remains the gold standard for effective control of all industries [177]. Therefore, bans combined with strong enforcement, offer the best protection for all unredeemable persistent problematic issues (e.g., close contact interactive settings, whether for proximal observation, feeding, trunk touching, assisted skin scrubbing, and assisted bathing or riding) arising from elephant tourism. Where elephant tourism is redeemable without persistent or unmanageable problems (e.g., public observation of free-ranging animals within national parks), positive list systems can offer permissive frameworks for promoters or providers. Positive lists are permissive registers of, for example, activities that havebeen subject to independent evaluation methods, typically using objective scientific algorithms, intended to ensure that such activities are safe for people, animals, and the environment [178, 179]. Activities not surviving evaluation scrutiny for positive listing are by default not permitted. Relevantly, positive lists comprise the normal operational procedures securing health and safety standards for all major industrial sectors, including pharmaceuticals, veterinary and human medical practices and practitioners, aircrafts, marine vessels, cars, buildings, and many other sectors [178, 179]. Recommendations Legal bans Legal bans on promotion and performance of close contact interactive elephant-human experiences combined with strong enforcement protocols, should constitute the primary gold standard measures for prevention and control of public health, safety, and animal welfare risks within the tourism industry, and become the earliest goal of all regulatory authorities and other actors. Consistent policies Public health and safety, species conservation, and animal welfare organizations and programs within their communities should rapidly adopt consistently strong policies toward discouraging elephant tourism, based on messaging outlining established interrelationships between disease prevention and control, animal welfare, and species and ecological conservation. Cease commercial promotion Commercial promoters of tourism in which elephants are used in close contact interactive settings, whether for proximal observation, feeding, trunk touching, assisted skin scrubbing, and assisted bathing or riding, should not anticipate formal governmental interventions but rather rapidly and greatly strengthen guidance against all relevant activities, as well as cease their promotion. All information and guidance should be based on entirely independent scientific input. 24/7 surveillance of captive elephants Providers of tourism should rapidly institute live-feed digital cameras that stream images to key public assess platforms ensuring that no areas where elephants have access are unavailable for independent 24/7 scrutiny to offer some animal welfare securities. Significant penalties should be applied for either accidental or deliberate interruptions in streaming losses to deter obfuscation. Positive list systems for tourism promoters or providers Where elephant tourism involves public observation of free-ranging animals within national parks, governments should seek to develop positive list systems for promoters or providers to clarify and ensure that such activities are legitimately differentiated from problematic captive scenarios. Acknowledgments This project was funded by (in alphabetical order): Animals Asia, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (US), and Save The Asian Elephants, which had no input into design, analysis, conclusions, recommendations, or other directional role in this study. v For References see weblink at top of article .