Protected Areas Not Always Harbour Crop Raiding Animals, Says Study on Indian Tiger Reserves

Tweet

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.

Texting facility to warn about elephant raids in forest-fringe villages developed

Tweet

Unexpected elephant raids are the worst nightmare of a forest-fringe village in India. But what if there is somebody to text you in advance that the jumbos are on the way? Researchers in Tamil Nadu claimed to have developed an intrusion detection system which can text forest officials an early warning if an elephant heard is moving towards a village. 

An Indian elephant in the wild: from Nagarhole National Park in Karnataka

Texting an elephant raid warning

According to S. J. Sugumar of Coimbatore Institute of Technology and R. Jayaparvathy of SSN College of Engineering Chennai, who developed the system, it functions by tracking the movement of the elephants electronically with the help of the vibrations on the ground created by the footfall of the animal. The system, according to the researchers, has to be implemented in “specific pockets identified based on the analytical results along the forest border areas where the elephants can intrude from the forest into human habitation.” It consists of a geophone string, threshold comparator with amplification module, embedded micro controller, GSM, and the power supply.

A research article published in Current Science journal about the system says that the footfall of the elephant produces a vibration in the ground which is sensed by the geophones that are buried underground. After sensing the vibration, the geophone will generate an electrical signal which will be amplified and compared with a set threshold value which is based on that generated by the footfall of a single elephant. If it exceeds the threshold, the system is designed to trigger the embedded controller to send a warning SMS with the help of the GSM transceiver to the forest officials. The geophones with a range of 120 square meters can cover a large area when used as a string of five geophones, claim the researchers.

Impact on human-elephant conflicts

Geo-phone as part of the elephant intrusion detection system
(Image Courtesy: Current Science)

The study was carried out in Coimbatore forest division which has recorded a number of cases of human-elephant conflict. According to official figures, there were 680 incidents of elephant intrusion into human habitat in 2011 while it was 844 in 2010 and 560 in 2009. In 2011, 14 people were killed in elephant attack while the figure was 16 in 2010 and 11 in 2009. In the conflict, there was a reported death of 10 elephants in 2011, 11 in 2010 and 12 in 2009. The implementation of the system is expected to help bring down the number of incidents of unexpected elephant raids and resulting causalities on both sides.

However, there are chances that other heavy animals walking over the buried geophones trigger false alarms. To avoid this confusion, the researchers have identified four different types of possible responses and have designed the system in such a way that false alarms are not triggered. According to the researchers, on field trials, the performance of the system to differentiate the vibrations generated by different species of animals was 91.25 percent. Analyzing the migration data of elephants in an area can be well used to predict the possibilities of intrusion almost precisely, say the researchers.

Biodiversity Conservation in India

Tweet

India is home to forests with rich wildlife. However, being the second most populated country in the world, the enormous pressure of the exploding human population of the country is shrinking the forests, wiping off the rich fauna and flora. To conserve the remaining greenery and the rare life forms, India has made efficient in-situ conservation programmes to conserve ecologically important areas by regulating human intervention. These efforts have established a protected area network in the country within this period.

Protected Area Network in India

Forests and Wildlife are included in the concurrent list by the Indian constitution which holds federal states responsible for implementing the policies formulated by the Centre to conserve forests and wildlife. In India, the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) formulates the policy framework for forest and wildlife conservation. The board, which is chaired by the Prime Minister, has formulated and adopted National Wildlife Action Plan in 2002, which will extend till 2016.

A Sambar deer (Rusa unicolor) at Nagarhole National Park in Karnataka, India

According to Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), India has 668 protected areas in the country, as of 2010. However, they together constitute just 4.90 percent of the total area of the country. Among these, 102 are National Parks, 515 are Wildlife Sanctuaries, 47 are Conservation Reserves and 4 are Community Reserves.

The terms are indeed confusing and often rake up unnecessary issues  when used by scaremongers.

What is a National Park?

According to Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, a National Park should be an area with enough ecological, geo-morphological and natural significance, obviously, with rich fauna and flora. Central Government enjoys the freedom to declare any specific area in the country a National Park, but often based on the recommendations made the state governments. A National Park is declared to protect, to propagate and to to develop wildlife or its environment. Actually the major difference between a National Park and other protected areas is that the rights of the people living inside the limits of a national Park are often tightly regulated. While grazing by livestock inside a national park is strictly prohibited, removal of forest produce needs recommendation from National Board of Wildlife.

What is a Wildlife Sanctuary (WLS)?

One of the peaks of Agasthyamalai ranges as seen from Neyyar Wildlife Sanctuary, Kerala

Though a WLS is again an area with zoological, ecological and geomorphological importance and with rich fauna and flora, it has certain differences with National Parks and other protected areas in India. Despite the fact that it is declared by the Central Government to protect wildlife and to develop natural habitats, the rights of the people living inside the limits of the sanctuary differs very much from other PAs. Comparatively, people living inside the limits of a Wildlife Sanctuary have more rights than their counterparts within a National Park. It is also allowed that the District Collector, in consultation with the Chief Wildlife Warden may decide to allow the continuation of any right during the settlement of claims.

Conservation Reserves in India

Unlike NPs and WLS, a conservation Reserve is declared by state governments. Usually the area will be owned by the government and lies near to Wildlife Sanctuaries or National Parks. These often function as a buffer zone for a protected area or a link which connects two protected areas together. However, an area will be declared as Conservation Reserve only after holding adequate consultations with the local people. (In fact, that happens with the other PAs also.) There are no regulations on the rights of the people living inside a Conservation Reserve.

Community Reserves in India

Again, declared by state government, a Community Reserve can even be privately or community owned land declared so when an individual or community volunteers to conserve the area and its natural fauna and flora. Apart from protecting the natural habitat and environment, Community Reserves may also protect cultural values and practices related to the area. There are no regulations on the rights of the people living inside a Community Reserve. Till date, there are only four community reserves in the country - Kokkare Bellur Community Reserve in Karnataka, Kadalundi- Vallikkunnu Community Reserve in Kerala (both are for conserving birds), Lalwan Community Reserve and Keshopur-chhamb Community Reserves in Punjab also.

Biosphere Reserves (BRs)

Biosphere Reserves are another term which often pops up when it comes to biodiversity conservation in India. However, unlike NPs, WLS and Community or Conservation Reserves, BRs are larger in their areas, and are not formed according to the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

According to MoEF, BRs are “areas of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems which are internationally recognized within the framework of the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) programme of the UNESCO.” Thus, Biosphere Reserves may have one more national parks or Wildlife Sanctuaries in it.

While National Board of Wildlife is the apex body to decide on National Parks, The Indian National Man and Biosphere (MAB) Committee constituted by the MoEF is the apex body in the case of BRs in the country.

In India, the programme was started in 1986, with which so far, 18 sites have been declared as Biosphere Reserves (BRs). However, out of the 18 BRs, only eight has been accepted as part of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves of UNESCO.  They are

1.            Nilgiri (Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka) 
2.            Gulf of Mannar (Tamil Nadu)
3.            Sunderban (West Bengal)
4.            Nanda Devi, (Uttarakhand) 
5.            Pachmarhi (Madhya Pradesh) 
6.            Similipal (Odisha) 
7.            Nokrek (Meghalaya) 
8.            Achanakmar-Amarkantak (Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh) 

India has submitted a revised nomination for Great Nicobar (Andaman & Nicobar Islands) also. 

You can have a look at the MoEF document about the protected area network below.

Roads affect large mammal movement in Nagarhole Tiger Reserve, says a study

Tweet

An Indian Elephant (Elephas maximus indicus), crossing a  patrolling path at Nagarhole Tiger Reserve, Karnataka, India

 Constructing roads through protected areas will severely affect the wild life, reveals a recent study conducted on the Mysore- Mananthavady Highway which passes through Nagarhole Tiger Reserve, a major home for the big striped cat in South India.  According to the study, the road has caused certain large mammals to desert the adjoining areas while making some others more prone to be victims of road kill.

Comparing an abandoned segment with another one regularly used by the vehicles within a 20 KM distance, it was found that large mammals like Elephant (Elephas maximus indicus), Gaur(Bos garus) , Chital (Axis axis), Wild pig (Sus scrofa) and Tiger tend to avoid the road edges restricting themselves to other forest areas.

This does not mean that animals don’t usually use that place, but just avoid it. The study has found that 681 animal trails have intersected the portion of the road under study. However, the mean density of animal trails on the unused segment was 40 percent more than that in the used segment, indicating that the road is restricting natural wild life movement.

  

Swelling vehicle traffic

The study observed a startling 22 fold increase in vehicular traffic on this road which connects Wayanad district of Kerala with Mysore district of Karnataka, in seven years despite a traffic ban in the night.

According to Sanjay Gubbi, H. C. Poornesha and M. D. Madhusudan from Nature Conservation Foundation and Wild life Conservation Society who conducted the study, vehicle density was 50 per day in 2003, when traffic was allowed all the 24 hours. Now it has reached a massive 553 a day despite a 12 hour traffic ban.

Roads thrills but kills

Roads passing through Nagarhole Tiger Reserve in Karnataka

However, it was also found that large mammals like Sambar deer (Rusa unicolor) are not repelled by roads. This is due to the presence of grass and tender leaves in the road edges due to the routine clearance by the forest department, says the study.

The routine clearance along road edges creates micro habitats which attracts many herbivores, making them more prone to road kills. According to experts, this is the major reason why herbivores like Sambar deer, chital, mouse deer (Moschiola meminna), black naped hare (Lepus

nigricollis) and small Indian civet (Viverricula indica) becomes the top names in road kills near protected areas.

Better EIAs and measures

The findings of the study call for immediate measures to check over speeding on such roads which is a major reason for animal death from vehicle collision. It also demands effective implementation of scientifically designed animal crossing structures across such roads.

But above all, the need of the hour is to conduct long-term environment impact assessments even after completion of developmental initiatives to find out unforeseen impacts. If we hurry again under the false notion of development to become a global power, we may commit irreversible mistakes to the future generations by swiping away the remaining biodiversity of our nation.

Indian leopard (Panthera pardus fusca) at Nagarhole Tiger Reserve (Video)