Pain of the elephant/human conflict

Reports of casualties, both human and elephant, are monotonous daily fare in our newspapers. They are in danger of becoming a mere scorecard, with little useful impact. The problem is very real, and a far cry from times when we only read about elephant casualties by collisions on rail tracks. The afflicted communities unfairly place the blame on WildLife officers. In reality, what can these poor officials do? The expensive device of electric fences, have clearly failed – largely because regular maintenance is difficult, if not impossible. Fire crackers are now too well recognized by elephants, making them woefully ineffective. The use of “Hakkapatas” is cruel and ineffective. Shooting is illegal. Several practices operate, but individually they are of limited use.

The conflict is aggravated by the need for human settlements, often urgently implemented, such as those under the Accelerated Mahaweli Project. Inevitably, because large extents, often intruding on the traditional elephant migration paths, have to be on offer, to interest large contractors for jungle clearing. Tragically, it is the settler families that have now to contend with elephant inroads.

There is evidently no single measure that by itself is effective – perhaps a combination may be. The marauding elephants probably see cultivations as handy food, and houses as sources for grain and salt. If these are provided, they may see no need to invade cultivations and dwellings.

A multi-pronged effort could at least yield a partial solution, and would require:

(i) A clear recognition of habitual migration paths.

(ii) The positioning of physical barriers – such as trenches or bamboo plantations.

(iii) The use of linked bee boxes – reported to be effectively employed in Thailand. It is claimed that chilli plants also deter elephants.

(iv) The provision of appropriately placed “Salt Licks”.

(v) Setting aside of extents planted in crops that elephants are known to prefer. This is not unfamiliar to farmers – mimicking the tradition of the “kurulu paluwa” of paddy cultivators. Planting of corridors immediately outside physical impediments, (such as electric fences/bamboo plantings) with crops like bananas, manioc, kithul, maize, sugarcane, rain-fed paddy etc. This could be through Shramadana campaigns organized by State officials or voluntary benefactors marshalled by politicians of local bodies. Even if it needs to be done at State expense, it could still be a socially worthwhile investment. Planting materials where practicable, may be contributed or purchased from the settlers themselves.

(vi) The operations should be done as a co-operative venture with the settlers, to encourage self-help – the effectiveness benefitting from the experience and operation of such programmes as “Gammedda,” implemented successfully with private sector support.

This is admittedly “Armchair” musing, but of some use, hopefully.

“Those who can, do – those who can’t, – teach”

Dr UPATISSA PETHIYAGODA