Indian Leopard (Panthera pardus fusca) Image Credit: Kalyan Varma |
Crop raiding by
wild animals is a major issue that triggers human animal conflict and
retaliatory killing in many parts of the country. But a new study about the
human animal conflict around Protected Areas (PAs) in the country shows that
protected areas not necessarily act as a source of crop raiders always. The
finding is significant at a time when the establishment of new protected areas are
opposed by sections of public and politicians saying that it will intensify the
menace of crop raiding.
A survey
conducted among 398 households which are situated within 10 kilometers of three
major tiger reserves in the country – Ranthambhore, Kanha and Nagarhole – found
that the rate of crop loss from crop raiders did not vary with the proximity to
the PAs, showing that protected areas are not always sources for crop raiders.
“This (the
results) may suggest crop raiders may not be limited to animals coming out from
the PA, and perhaps some raiders may naturally reside outside the PAs”, says
the study. Instead of the proximity, it is the forage availability that has
increased the chances of crop loss in all these PAs, shows that results of the
study, which is published in the Environmental Management Journal. “Factors
related to forage availability for wildlife- the number of harvests per year,
share cropping (growing crops on someone else’s land), number of crops per year
and cropping months in a year all increased risk”, it says.
Analyzing the
effectiveness of the mitigation efforts, the study found that two mitigation
efforts – fencing and the use of guarding animals were most effective in decreasing
risk of crop loss from crop-raiding animals.
Livestock Loss near Tiger Reserves
Loss of
livestock is another major cause for human animal conflict near protected areas in India. During the study, 13
percent of the households reported cattle loss from wild animals. Though tiger,
Hyena, dhole (Cuon alpinus), Jackal, wild pig and even macaques were blamed fro
livestock loss, leopard was identified as the most damaging.
However, statistically
examining the reasons, the study found that complaints of
carnivores attacking livestock or human were more associated with people
grazing animals and collecting forest produces from inside the protected areas.
“Respondents reported that
livestock losses occurred inside the PAs during the day, and fewer incidents
occurred at night when the livestock were corralled near their homes or
villages”, finds the study.
According to the
findings of the study, simply stopping animal grazing inside the protected
areas under study may decrease the rate of livestock loss. However, it heavily
depends on the availability of grazing area outside the PAs.
Hostility towards animals
Contrary to the
wide belief that people are hostile towards carnivores that attack the
livestock, the study found that people are more hostile towards herbivores like
wild pig which cause damage to crops. “Households reported greater inclination to kill
herbivores destroying crops or carnivores harming people, but not carnivores
preying on livestock”, says the study.
Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) Image Credit: Kalayan Varma |
However, the hostility
towards animals was different in the three tiger Reserves in which the study
was carried out. According to the researchers, residents near Kanha National Park
showed more inclination towards killing the problem animals as a solution to
the hypothetical situations put in front of them, despite the lowest reported
livestock deaths from this area.
Residents near Ranthambhore National Park and
Nagarhole National Park preferred to frighten or deter the animals.
Flawed Compensation Policies
Monetary
compensation from wildlife officials is one of the major ways to suppress possible
retaliatory killing of animals by people in areas of human animal conflict. However,
the study found that 99 percent of the households which participated in the
study received no compensation from authorities for losses. “There is an urgent need to corroborate losses reported
by local residents to official records to identify gaps and improve
compensation distribution to households reporting losses”, says the study.
Krithi K.
Karanth and Ruth DeFries from Columbia University, Lisa Naughton-Treves from
University of Wisconsin and Arjun M.
Gopalaswamy from University of Oxford co-authored the study.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please feel free to have your say on our stories. Comments will be moderated. anonymous Comments will not be approved. No links in the comment body unless meant for sharing a very relevant info.