Selfless Souls
Nepalese researcher Sanjeeta Sharma Pokharel explores Asian elephant physiology and behaviour in response to ecological challenges, emphasizing the importance of context and experience in understanding elephants. She underlines the need for cross-border cooperation and learning between Nepal and India to understand the behaviour of the animals and to minimize negative interactions. A post-doctoral fellow at Kyoto University in Japan, Pokharel investigates how elephants adapt physiologically to ecological, climatic, and anthropogenic challenges. Pokharel, a member of the Asian Elephant Specialist Group at the IUCN, the global wildlife conservation authority, has conducted pioneering research into stress physiology in elephants in India, particularly in Karnataka and Bengal. The findings of her research, which involved analyzing elephant dung, highlight the importance of context, experience, and personality in understanding elephants, stressing that results from one study cannot be universally applied …
Q: What can Nepal learn from India when it comes to understanding and saving elephants?
The landscape and situations differ. India, being a large country, isn’t homogenous — attitudes toward elephants and tolerance levels vary across regions. There’s no one-size-fits-all solution. Each landscape presents unique challenges. I can’t speak much about management since it’s not my domain, but from a scientific perspective, India is progressing faster. Researchers, there are delving into physiology, behaviour, genetics, and even cognition. In Nepal, we’re not quite there yet. Researchers like Ashok Ram are making strides, focusing on habitat and conflict, but there’s still a significant research gap. In India, long-term monitoring has been ongoing since the 1980s, with various research stations across the country. This made my research easier. I analyzed stress hormone markers in elephant dung to study their responses in different environments, from wild areas to human-dominated landscapes. In India, the forest department collaborates closely with researchers, identifying elephant corridors and implementing science-based policies. Unfortunately, this level of collaboration and policymaking hasn’t happened in Nepal yet.
Q: Now for the reverse question: What can India learn from Nepal?
Nepal is home to a few hundred elephants, most of which are migratory, while India has more than 30,000. Given the vast differences in landscape and elephant population sizes, I’d reframe the question to explore opportunities for cross-boundary cooperation between the two countries. Nepal, being smaller with fewer elephants, can serve as a testing ground for pilot projects. By improving connectivity, we can assess long-term survival and reproduction benefits for elephants. Since Nepal’s areas are smaller, measuring the results of new conservation measures becomes more manageable. This can provide valuable insights that India might scale up for broader applications.
Q: In Nepal, the focus is on linking science to conservation. What are your thoughts on this?
While it is important to link science to conservation, this approach can put undue pressure on researchers to produce immediate results. We need to inspire young researchers to pursue studies that contribute to science itself, not just conservation. This balance can lead to more innovative and impactful discoveries.
Q: Let’s discuss the transboundary movement of elephants between India and Nepal and the issue of fencing, particularly in eastern Nepal. What’s your take on this?
Most wild elephants in Nepal are migratory, visiting seasonally rather than residing permanently. Fencing their traditional paths isn’t a good idea. It might offer a temporary fix, but it just shifts the problem elsewhere. Elephants need to move freely; confinement isn’t an option for them. Elephants are incredibly clever. They’ve been observed using their tusks, which don’t conduct electricity, to bypass electrified fencing. They quickly adapt and change their behaviour. Instead of fencing off the elephants, we should consider fencing off communities and homes, though we don’t have enough data to confirm its effectiveness. This underscores the need to understand the basic behaviour and biology of elephants. For instance, some people ask about “mad” elephants that harm people, but even local communities often don’t understand the musth phase in male elephants during the mating season when they become overly aggressive due to a testosterone spike. At a transboundary level, cooperation is essential. Governments need to collaborate, raise awareness among people, and recognize that fencing isn’t a viable long-term solution.
Q: How can a better understanding of the basic biology and behaviour of elephants help mitigate negative interactions?
Scientific understanding can help us track elephant movements, monitor reproduction, and implement early-warning systems. Educating people about safe practices — such as avoiding alcohol, using flashlights at night, and not aggravating elephants — can reduce conflicts. We need to adjust human behaviour to align with elephant behaviour. Providing timely compensation for damages can prevent negative feelings toward elephants, and recognizing that their behavior is predictable can help people avoid danger by staying out of their way.
Q: Does this mean we also need to study human behaviour along with elephant behaviour?
Initially, I planned to study both, but my professor advised that it was too ambitious. Additionally, obtaining permits for hormonal measurements in humans is challenging. However, we can study human behaviour around elephants and identify ways to change it to reduce negative interactions. Understanding and adapting human actions based on elephant behaviour can significantly decrease conflicts.
Q: Is there any relation between stress levels and negative interactions? Are negative interactions more likely when an elephant is under stress?
I wish we knew that for sure, but currently, we don’t have definitive evidence linking stress hormone levels to aggression in elephants. Just like with humans, elephants may respond to stress in various ways — some might become aggressive, while others might flee, hide, or remain still. This variability in stress responses likely exists in elephants as well.
Q: As a researcher, do you believe that keeping stress levels low is important for improving quality of life and reproductive success?
Absolutely. Just as low-stress levels are crucial for human well-being, the same applies to elephants. Measuring stress levels can also gauge the effectiveness of conservation initiatives. If stress levels remain stable or decrease, it indicates success; if they rise, it signals a need for reassessment. This approach helps ensure that conservation efforts are truly benefiting elephant populations.
Q: What’s next for your research interest?
The two crucial issues for elephants are the long-term viability of their population and their reproductive success. These factors are essential to prevent their extinction. Several areas need more exploration, such as zoonotic diseases and the impact of climate change. Although some work has been done on tuberculosis in captive elephants, it is quite limited. To study an entire generation of elephants, one would need to live over 200 years, which isn’t feasible. So, I look at past studies retrospectively. We’ve also used hair strands from elephants’ tails to understand their stress responses, but this method only covers the past two to three years. I’m interested in venturing into paleoecology to examine fossilized records of elephants’ ancestors. This could provide insights into what led to their extinction, helping us prevent a similar fate for Asian elephants. Additionally, we are planning research projects across Southeast Asia and Nepal. Hopefully, this will give physiology and behaviour research a much-needed start in Nepal.
Leave a comment