To protect biodiversity and wildlife and minimize human-animal conflicts, it is imperative that the role of local communities in wildlife conservation be highlighted, and they be encouraged to share resources with and actively participate in conservation efforts. Fostering community-based conservation is key to wildlife protection, feel experts. TreeTake takes a look ...
Man-animal conflict—the term more often than not conjures up a bloody picture, a feline tearing into a human, or people attacking a wild beast. But is it really a conflict, or just encounters that turn nasty at times? In India, animals have been respected since time immemorial. Most Hindu deities have animals as their mounts (vahan)-the Goddess Durga rides a tiger, Lord Shiva a bullock (Nandi), Lord Vishnu Garud (eagle), Kumarswamy peacock, Lord Ganesha mouse, Lord Dattatreya is accompanied by four dogs and a cow and so on, emphasizing peaceful coexistence, mainly because both man and animal have to share the same landscape and resources. The concept of Van Devi (forest goddess) in our culture also depicts respect for forests and forest wealth. Human-animal encounters occur when the two transgress into each other’s territory. A wild animal has frugal needs: food and water, a suitable habitat, and a mate. It forays into human territory when the first two needs are not met. Humans, on the other hand, invade forests for fuel, fodder, mahua, and a lot many other things, with scant regard that this is animal territory. So, there is often a chance of the two encountering each other and the encounter resulting in a casualty.
Thus, the prime reasons for animals venturing into human habitations are prey depletion and loss of habitat, through human encroachment or any development activity. While it is impossible to confine both man and animals in separate territories by erecting electrical fences and whatnot, it is imperative to increase awareness among humans and rope in local communities, particularly those living in fringe areas of forests, to take a lesson from the tribals of Maharashtra, Goa, and some other places and learn to co-exist peacefully.
Dr Kuruvilla Thomas, IFS(R), Member, Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Kerala, said: "Due to professional management and strict enforcement of wildlife laws by forest officials, the population of almost all species of wildlife has increased. Biotic interference and diversion of forest areas for development projects have caused habitat degradation and fragmentation. These factors are causing wildlife to enter human habitation, resulting in the loss of human lives and agricultural crops. Man-animal conflict mitigation measures should be carried out with the active participation of local people who are the major stakeholders and worst-affected partners. Involving locals ensures finding solutions that are ecologically feasible and socially acceptable. Strategies that are acceptable to the community are more likely to be successful and sustainable. This inclusion helps to balance the needs of wildlife conservation with the livelihoods and safety of human populations. Wildlife should not be seen as a liability or hindrance to the progress of local communities. Empowering local communities through involvement in wildlife management and eco-tourism activities gives them employment opportunities and income. This economic incentive further motivates communities to engage in and support wildlife conservation efforts and mitigate man-animal conflict."
Senior forest official (retired) Anuj Saxena said: "Undoubtedly locals can prove to be good custodians of forests and wildlife, for who knows the local flora, fauna and terrain better than them? But roping them in depends on their condition. Their needs, circumstances, and attitudes are very different today than in earlier times. The same applies to animals too. Earlier, needs were few and everything was sufficient. But now man's needs have multiplied as in modern times, and nature is the one to be exploited first. Hence the conflict with wildlife. To cite an example, I worked on a World Bank forestry project and some other projects too. We tried to determine why villagers exploited forests. We talked to villagers and tried to fix their priorities. After discussions, it emerged that their priorities were paved lanes, schools, hospitals, banks, police chowki, and so on. Greenery was 11th or 12th on their priority list. So naturally, their priorities and requirements will have to be seen and met to enlist their cooperation. Especially in areas where man-animal conflicts are more, the government must ensure that the basic requirements of the local populace are met, to involve them in conservation moves. Yes, they should be made aware of the importance of wildlife and biodiversity but what is most important is motivation. That comes only when either one loves wildlife or is attracted to it, which happens only when all other needs are met."
Man-animal conflicts
Man-animal conflicts are common in various parts of India. It is mostly big cat attacks that draw the most attention, but it is equally true that wild elephants kill as many, if not more, people than felines. Wild boars also figure in man-animal conflict, as do wild dogs and bears while Nilgai and sambar deer etc. are marauders, ravaging crops and causing damage. So, human-animal conflict may stem from monkey menace in the urban areas or crop damage and other types of depredations by elephants, wild boars, and other animals, apart from feline attacks in rural areas. In western Uttar Pradesh, sugar cane fields are a common prowling ground for leopards. They live and even breed there, all the time sending shivers down the spine of locals who are afraid to venture out into their fields. People of Bijnor district have faced several attacks by leopards in the past two years which led to the deaths of 18 persons in the district. Sightings and incidents of leopard attacks on villagers were also reported in neighbouring Meerut, Hapur, Bulandshahr, Amroha, Baghpat, and Saharanpur districts.
The big cats appear to have settled in the cane fields after being driven out of the reserve forest of Amaangarh Tiger Reserve in the wake of the growing population of tigers. Leopard sightings have also been reported from Greater Noida, Pilibhit, Bahraich, and even Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh, apart from Uttarakhand and several other parts of the country. People in about 300 villages in Uttar Pradesh's Pilibhit routinely encounter big cats that stray into their farms from the adjoining Pilibhit Tiger Reserve (PTR), a bustling habitat for the Bengal Tiger (Panthera tigris). At times, however, these encounters prove fatal. According to official records, 22 persons from these villages have been mauled to death by tigers since November 2019. Human–leopard conflict regions of the country also include West Bengal, Maharashtra, and Assam where most of the deadly leopard attack incidents happened.
The Corbett National Park of Uttarakhand is also known for at least 400 leopard attacks on humans. Leopards are still one of the most dangerous big cats in India. In Kashmir, some carnivore species like leopard and black bear are threatened with extinction due to this conflict with humans. A burgeoning population, rapid encroachment and subsequently shrinking wild land mean closer contact between humans and wild animals, which may often be nasty for one or the other or perhaps both. Data suggests there were about 235 deaths and 650 injuries due to these conflicts from 2010 – 2012. The injured persons were mainly from different areas of Kashmir and lived near protected areas and forests. Such areas include Kupwara, Lolab, Handwara, Baramulla, Tangmarg, Shopian, Ganderbal, Anantnag, and Srinagar where crops, livestock, and property face damage and sometimes there are human casualties. In retaliation, animals like leopards and black bears are often injured or killed. This is again on account of food problems as, during summer and autumn, bears are on the prowl owing to the availability of fruit and crops in localities near forests and protected areas.
As for tuskers, data suggests over 400 persons are killed annually in tusker attacks, and that the highest number of such conflicts occurs in Odisha. Elephant deaths, on the other hand, mostly take place at the hands of poachers and due to high-tension power lines. Here too, human-tusker conflicts are a result of increasing deforestation and habitat erosion, driving elephants into human habitations, according to environmentalists. As per a green activist: “Forest cover has been dwindling at an alarming rate on account of human interference, forcing elephants to raid villages near the forests in quest of food and water.”
In fact, the heavy fragmentation of elephant habitat in Bengal resulted in an intense human-elephant conflict causing not only loss of agricultural crops but also human and elephant lives. To sum up, crop and property damage and the killing of livestock and human beings are some of the worst forms of man-animal conflict. The increase in man-animal conflict is likely due to the greater resilience and adaptability of wild animals in the face of their shrinking habitats, which allow them to live successfully close to human habitation. Degradation of habitats, depletion of the natural prey base, changing crop patterns, suitability of man-modified habitats to wild animals, presence of stray dogs and cattle in forest fringe areas, etc. are other reasons. Crops like sugarcane are said to offer excellent cover for wild animals.
Prey-base depletion needs the utmost attention
Predatory animals, particularly big cats, rely on natural prey such as deer, wild boar, and monkeys for their survival. However, with the loss and fragmentation of natural habitats, the availability of natural prey has decreased. This has led them to venture into human settlements in search of food, making them more vulnerable to conflict with humans. If sufficient prey base is ensured, there is less likelihood of their making forays in human habitations.
PCCF, UP, Sudhir Kumar Sharma said: “We have actively gone in for community involvement. In protected areas, we rope in locals in patrolling, management activities, and some other work. In wildlife areas, we have formed eco-development communities too for forest protection and minimising man-animal conflicts. Near tiger zones, we have appointed Bagh Mitras, identifying villagers who wield influence in their villages, are educated, aware, or have an interest in wildlife. They help the forest department in various ways, particularly in pacifying villagers if a conflict does take place. In fringe areas, locals like Bagh Mitra help in the conservation and protection of wildlife. We are also involving locals in eco-tourism in protected areas. As for the prey base, there is no depletion. The prey base is sufficient. However, the population of felines in protected areas is increasing, resulting in territorial fights and some animals being pushed out. Mostly, tigers push out leopards, as seen in West UP.”
Community involvement holds the key
It is crucial to protect and restore ecosystems to sustain biodiversity and the ecosystem services that support social well-being and development. However, all such efforts require active and inclusive involvement and empowerment of local people, living with wildlife who depend on and manage these ecosystems. Expanding the local populace's role should be a priority.
But there are challenges--like lack of resources that enable people living with wildlife and animals to thrive in. Community conservation models to balance and promote social empowerment can come in handy here. Under these models, local communities living with wildlife are equipped with skills and resources to improve local socioeconomic conditions, preserve ecosystems, and enhance biodiversity health and structure. There is no conflict between wildlife and people, though there are problems at times because both need to share the same space and resources. An elephant needs the crops in the field at the edge of the forest to satiate his hunger but, for the farmer, the crops are his livelihood. Both the tusker and the farmer want the same yield. If the farmers have worked hard to cultivate the crops, it is the elephants who have ensured rainfall by spreading the forests when they dispersed seeds over long distances. The conflict arises because both want to use the same resources but are unable to reach a middle ground.
Hence the people living with wildlife should be influenced through perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge. By creating legitimacy and ownership for conservation, strengthening support for protection, and delivering economic, social, and cultural benefits, a positive impact can be created. It should also be realized that feeding on crops by wild herbivores is as ancient as farming. Some communities that have historically lived near the forests are resigned to the fact that a part of their farm produce will be eaten by wild animals since it is also their area. This is probably an ancient coping strategy to deal with crop loss in an area that also is home to wild animals. However, it may be tough to accept such losses when a farmer has taken a loan for sowing crops and they are destroyed.
More importantly, it is essential to dispel the notion that forest is for animals and rest for humans. People have shared space and resources with wild animals for centuries and this thought contravenes the principle of co-existence. Research has shown that a GPS-tagged great Indian bustard used more than 1,000 sq km area across three states. Can one expect that it be restricted to a 5 sq km protected area? Similarly, an elephant in West Bengal went across to Nepal and came back, covering over 700 sq km. How does one expect him to live in a 600 sq km protected area?
Prof Venkatesh Dutta, School of Environment Sciences, Baba Sahab Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, said: "We have a culture of living in harmony with nature and wildlife. The conflict is for territory, primarily due to human encroachment. If people living in the fringe areas of forests are made aware to respect animal territory boundaries and buffer zones, conflicts will be minimized. People should know when it is safe to go into forests and when it is not. For instance, it is dangerous during the breeding season of big cats. And yes, locals can be motivated to pitch in for wildlife protection." Senior forest official now retired, Roopak Dey said: "Local populations near protected areas should be made aware, educated, and motivated to protect wildlife. To minimize conflicts, they should know they have to respect the animal territory. They should not make unnecessary forays in the forest to avoid encounters and should understand the importance of wildlife and the need to co-exist peacefully."
However, senior forest official, Dr HS Pabla, (now retired) feels local communities can be involved in conservation and minimising conflicts only when they know that danger from wildlife to themselves has been minimised and that they would be deriving some benefits from wildlife and forests. Such avenues should be explored first. As long as it is believed that wild animals have to be confined within forests, the right solutions will be elusive as our premise is at fault. Restricting wildlife forcibly to protected areas may jeopardize their conservation. As humans have demarcated protected areas, only humans can understand them. Besides, the issue involves both man and animals and the interactions and encounters between them, but the interventions solely target wildlife, such as trapping and relocating big cats should they step out of the forest or erect fences, etc. The human side of the issue must also be considered. It is high time it was accepted that wildlife would never understand man-made boundaries and stick to them. There is a vital need to sensitize humans about this aspect. Hence community-planned, run, and managed schemes are required due to the inherent nature of community involvement. Instead of reactive measures like offering compensation to locals in case of a casualty or any damage, proactive measures are required, like helping in building livestock shelters, helping with community-run electric fences, and awareness about the issue and possible solutions that arise out of discussion with the communities themselves. Only a combination of a good understanding of wildlife outside Protected Areas and combining it with a focus on the human dimension can ensure a peaceful relationship between wildlife and humans.
Taking a lesson from tribals
Certain communities worship the big cats, thereby signifying a peaceful co-existence with wildlife. The Warli community of Maharashtra has been worshipping ‘Waghoba’ (a leopard or tiger deity) for protection from leopards, which has prompted their peaceful coexistence. For the Warlis, it is a reciprocal relationship, wherein Waghoba protects them from the negative impacts of sharing spaces with big cats if they worship the deity and conduct the required rituals, especially at the annual festival of Waghbaras. Not only the Warlis but the Bhaina, Bharia, Bhatra, Dangis, Gond, Gosain, Kol, Korku, Koshti, Velip tribes are also stout worshippers of Waghoba or Bagheshwar. They all have a deep reverence towards the deity and have held strong beliefs about it for generations. Small wonder, for they have a deep connection with nature. They live in small hamlets, often on the periphery of the forests, but know how to share space. They respect wild animals and their way of life. They believe that once the night falls, humans must stay indoors and not venture out alone, for it is time for the leopards to roam around. They firmly believe that forest rules must not be broken. They keep their surroundings clean and garbage-free so that there are no feral dogs etc. and even if a leopard comes, it leaves after a while. Such local arrangements that allay the conflict between man and animal may exist in several other cultures too.
Researchers and animal activists believe such traditions are also relevant in the modern era as they are likely to act as tolerance-building mechanisms and build an understanding of the term ‘peaceful coexistence among the coming generation. The Tharus living in villages around Dudhwa are also at peace with the big cats in their neighbourhood. They too respect the tiger’s timing, not venturing out when it is time for the feline’s night out. They believe it protects their fields from ravaging animals and have learned to co-exist peacefully, emphasizing that space must be shared with wildlife. The Baigas have helped in tiger conservation in Kanha National Park in Madhya Pradesh. This semi-nomadic tribe that relied on the forest lived in Kanha National Park but was relocated after 1968 to maintain the tiger habitat. But even then, the tribe continued as staunch supporters of forest and wildlife and forest officials relied on their experience and acumen for tiger conservation and wildlife protection. Research shows that positive interactions were prevalent long before the idea of wildlife conservation was conceived, but these interactions have never been highlighted, nor received much attention. As the aim of conservation is to promote coexistence, there is a need to look beyond the negative aspects of human-animal interactions and try to understand co-adaptation strategies that humans have developed over the centuries to survive and flourish with the large cats. The message is clear: We are fortunate to have large and diverse wildlife species that must be protected at all costs, as they are very important for biodiversity.
Wildlife cannot be confined to a particular space; it would die of inbreeding and due to other reasons. Nor can it be sent to another planet. So, there is no choice but to share land and resources. As said earlier, all our deities have animals as mounts, which underscores their inclusion not only in our culture but also in our mind space. It is high time people, particularly those living near protected areas and forest fringes, are made aware and motivated to act as custodians of our wildlife.
Leave a comment