Welcome curious minds to an intriguing blog! Humans and wildlife have coexisted since the dawn of civilisation, historically most encounters between humans and wildlife were life-threatening to each party. A simple term called Human-Wildlife Conflict coined by the IUCN World Parks Congress (Madden 2004) is defined as “when the needs and behaviour of wildlife impact negatively on the goals of humans or when the goals of humans negatively impact the needs of wildlife. These conflicts may result when wildlife damage crops, injure or kill domestic animals, threaten or kill people”. I will try my best to unravel the modern human-wildlife conflict in Sri Lanka.
Firstly, it is important to understand the historical aspect of livelihoods in Sri Lanka and the coexistence that prevailed during these periods and how it was lost to current society. During the many interesting and informative conversations I have had with farming communities in different regions, the older generation of farmers remember a time when farming was managed to ensure mutual benefits to both the wildlife and humans. Sri Lanka maybe a small island in the Indian Ocean but it has endemic and unique biodiversity that has coexisted with humans for centuries. Farming was practised in this island for a really long time but until the 21st century, farmer’s practised traditional methods which had incorporated measures to minimise harvest damage from wildlife. I have also learnt that farmer’s used to set aside a portion of their harvest for the animals as a generational practice for many centuries. Moreover, Traditional methods also depended on avian species such as Egrets (Ardeidae) to eat pests that would damage crops, especially in paddy fields. I have met farmers who told me they use to depend on the nesting of a bird known as “Wadu Kurulla”(Ploceus philippinus) which was used as an indicator for rainfall, which is no longer predictable due to climate change. Furthermore, some of these traditional practices were destroyed through the introduction of commercialised farming, led by multinational agricultural companies.
Image courtesy: Biplab Hazra's award-winning photograph
One of the reasons for me to address the human-wildlife conflict as my topic for this week is because at the beginning of this year the Sri Lankan Wildlife Department released shocking statistics of the human-elephant conflict in Sri Lanka. During the first 10 months alone, 311 elephants lost their lives in 2018. 48 elephants were killed by gunshot, 37 killed by electrocution, 16 elephants killed by trains accidents and 55 due to a variety of human activities. In the last year alone 95 people have also lost their lives to the same cause. These statistics only prove how serious this problem is becoming and that before we lose another species or affect further human livelihoods and loss of human lives, we should initiate efforts into tackling human-wildlife conflict now.
Image courtesy: Kishani Samaraweera (Sunday Observer, 2016)
There are many species that fall under human-wildlife conflict and in Sri Lanka, it includes, large mammals such as elephants, leopards, different varieties of monkeys, squirrels, crocodiles and lately even peafowls. Majority of the conflict is present in agricultural regions with high populations of wildlife such as near nature reserves and forests. Human-Elephant Conflict is a highly debated, discussed and well-understood hazard, Sri Lanka is currently trying to manage this hazard through many different projects. I cannot help but wonder why is it that there is an increasing trend in human-wildlife conflict in comparison to previous decades. The obvious reason would be the increment in the human population and the ever-expanding human settlements that are growing closer to areas with a high concentration of wildlife. With this said, farmers that I have spoken to have told me that some of the main reasons are due to the loss of traditional farming practices and that the severity of the conflict differs between animals. The measures that humans take towards certain wildlife also differ due to societal perceptions, for example most farmers will not hesitate to hurt an elephant due to their prolonged conflict with this mammal but humans may hesitate to hurt a peafowl since it has a religious significance among many communities (As it is the vehicle to a Hindu GOD known as Katharagama Deviyo).
Image courtesy: I.L.M. Rizan (Daily News, 2016).
The human-wildlife conflict has become a controversial hazard in Sri Lanka because it was approached by either conservationist purely concerned about the wildlife or the sociologist purely concerned about human welfare. It was evident that both parties suffer immensely during this battle and it cannot be blamed on to one side. It is important that we approach this conflict in a manner that benefits both the wildlife and the human population and find innovative methods of controlling this conflict. We have to ensure the survival of our wildlife globally and locally while also ensuring the welfare of people’s livelihood. More on the human-wildlife conflict will be published at a later time since I am also conducting some research on a specific human-wildlife conflict in Sri Lanka.
More information can be found in the following links:
Comments