|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 6 July 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Wild elephants walking towards extinction?
However, during the course of an interview with Ashley De Vos and Rohan Wijesinha of the Wildlife and Nature Protection Society of Sri Lanka (WNPS), they argued that some current practices utilised as part of eco-tourism and other wildlife management practices are actually contributing to the problem of the Human-Elephant Conflict in Sri Lanka. A conflict, that results in fatalities of up to 150 wild elephants and 50-60 humans each year. It involves only the wild elephant and of course humans, but not the domesticated working elephant. This writer will deal with the issues of eco-tourism and wildlife management later in this article. The question that needs to be asked and addressed is whether the long-term future of the wild elephant and wildlife in general is secure, to justify that wildlife can be a significant aspect of tourist interest and more importantly continue to be part of Sri Lanka's natural heritage beyond the next decade? Wildlife and not just elephant, because as Rohan Wijesinha of WNPS pointed out, the wild elephant is a keystone species, being critical to the natural management of its habitat, upon which the other wildlife are dependent. Statistics from the Department of Wildlife and Conservation (DWLC) covering 1990 to 2001 show that of the total of 1,369 recorded elephant deaths, 776 (56 per cent) were due to gunshot and 276 (20 per cent) were due to unknown reasons, while a further 96 (7 per cent) were caused by contact with electrified fences. Of these, at least 925 (67 per cent) were of male elephants. Furthermore WNPS highlighted that only 6 per cent of wild elephants are tuskers and for a tusker to be born, both parents need to have been sired by tuskers.
It does not require a statistician to realise that that if two thirds of the wild elephants being killed are male, the healthy reproduction of the wild elephant population will be affected long before extinction becomes a visible reality to the average person. Wijesinha of WNPS related an incident where rangers at Minneriya National Park, were saddened to see a mature female elephant of 35-40 years - prime age for an elephant which has the same lifespan as humans - allowing an adolescent male elephant of about 19 years to mate with it. Moreover, as Ashley De Vos of WNPS highlighted, female wild elephants are giving birth every 3 years (after the usual two-year gestation period), instead of the usual 5 years between offspring. "This is a sign of an elephant population feeling threatened and in panic". Both WNPS and DWLC agreed that current wild elephant population is around 3000, but there are no detailed scientific recordings. This is down from a figure of 30,000, but obviously a long time ago, bearing in mind that British colonialists' shooting-for-sport also contributed to the decimation of the wild elephant population. Statistics from the DWLC show that forest cover in Sri Lanka has reduced from 75 per cent in 1881 to 45 per cent in 1956 to 20 per cent in 2000. While this decrease in forest cover may match the increase in human population, the question needs to be asked whether any future forest clearances are necessary. Issues The issues involved in the human-elephant conflict are not simply a case of wild elephants coming across human habitation. It involves several issues, such as obviously the management of Protected Areas which include national parks, forest reserves and sanctuaries - (PAs), but also environmental issues, such as organic farming instead of slash and burn. The latter naturally requires greater land use and increases the need for human encroachment of elephant habitat. Another important factor is the construction of dams, particularly large ones, which reduce river water levels and thereby detrimentally affect the ecosystem. This is further accentuated by illegal pumping of water from the river by farmers,or from wells just beside the river by a sugar cane plantation - in a case highlighted by WNPS, the latter being technically legal. For the root cause of human-elephant conflict is the illegal and legal encroachment by humans of buffer zones around PAs, as well as in the elephant corridors that link all our national parks and forest reserves. De Vos of WNPS said, "It's the politicians who are putting these people there to show they are doing something in terms of development". Wijesinha related the example of failed farming colonisation of land near Tanamalvila, on the road from Uda Walawe National Park. Apparently about 12 years ago, poor urban people were given two acres each to farm, but were not told that the land becomes dry for eight months of the year. Therefore after enjoying one harvest, they went back to being poor urban dwellers. This land, which was previously secondary forest, though in ancient times was probably cultivated with the present dilapidated tanks, is now lying fallow. As elephants are a matriarchal society, when a male reaches adolescence, he is no longer accepted within the herd, thus preventing in-breeding and this requires the male to find a new herd, which usually entails using the corridors between the PAs. Elephants also need to migrate to access fresh sources of food. In Yala, for example, DWLC stated that not more than 60 wild elephants reside within its boundaries all year, while much more are migratory. And where the elephant goes other wildlife follow. De Vos of WNPS highlighted that elephants have long memories and that 20 years since using watering hole, in times of crisis, they can recall its location and proceed there. These corridors are the routes that wild elephants have retained in memory and past government organised and unsolicited use of these link areas and encroachment onto buffer zones around PAs are the primary cause of the conflict in Sri Lanka. Wijesinghe recalled that in the 1970s Sri Lanka was praised internationally for maintaining these natural Elephant corridor areas. Furthermore, Wijesinha citing a study by a North American academic, who travelled throughout Sri Lanka about a decade ago, said the study had showed that "if previously abandoned land is rehabilitated in this country, there will be no necessity to cut another tree". Tanks
This study had identified that if fallow land in Sri Lanka is fully utilised by renovating all the ancient tanks, there will be no need for human encroachment of Elephant habitat. De Vos added that "all over the country there are tanks and all you have to do is rehabilitate these tanks and there will be enough water". But what Wijesinha called "political expediency", has resulted in what can be described as very short-term benefits to farmers with votes, and the emergence of the Human-Elephant Conflict and its consequent long-term damage to both human and wild elephants. In order to deal with the existing problem, based on the fact that humans occupy wild elephant habitation areas, two Indian wildlife consultants, funded by Global Environment Facility (GEF-www.gefweb.org), a UN administered international organisation, interviewed all those concerned and put forward their findings and recommendations. H. S. Pabla and V. B. Mathur's paper titled Planning for Conservation of Biological Diversity: Lessons Learnt from Sri Lanka, was also published in the June 2001 issue of Loris, the monthly journal of WNPS. Their paper deals with several issues, based, this writer feels, on the assumption that the human occupation of these areas, including the elephant corridors, cannot be reversed. Pabla and Mathur argue that the management of Sri Lanka's PAs can be broadly divided into three categories. These are Institutional, Ecological and Socio-Economic. With regard to institutional factors, Pabla and Mathur point to the several government departments that have direct relevance on wildlife habitat management. These are the Forestry Department, DWLC as well as the Government Agents, resulting in duplication of effort, which also militates against accountability. Mr. Hendavitharana, of the DWLC, during an interview, said that as part of the current examination of all wildlife management policies, a proposal is under consideration to have a Monitoring or Management committee encompassing all relevant government departments, which will address this issue. In referring to the ecological issues, Pabla and Mathur stress that a large part of elephant fatalities are due to trap guns set around villages for poaching other animals. These authors continue by stating that, "elephants are in severe conflict with the marginal agriculturalist over all of their range, on account of their damaging crops and houses, and for killing human beings..."[as] more than 50 per cent of Sri Lanka's wild elephant population is believed to inhabit areas outside PAs and thus become involved in such conflict situations. However, it is not clear whether the 50 per cent figure includes those wild elephants in migration between PAs. A BBC World TV report in June 2003 on the Human-Elephant Conflict in Sri Lanka, illustrated the example of the farmer who saw his wife killed by a wild elephant, while he himself was injured in the attack. The TV report showed that the farmer in question now sets a trap gun with the intention of killing this elephant.Pabla and Mathur also highlight the plight of the leopard, arguing that poaching and the use of trap guns mean that its continued existence is likely to be in serious jeopardy. While De Vos said there are only about 300 sloth bears in Sri Lanka and they are facing extinction within five to ten years.
These authors conclude that, as the PAs administered by the DWLC is 40 per cent of forest cover in Sri Lanka, if they are effectively managed, it is a sure guarantee for preserving the endangered and endemic species, as well as the forest cover of the country. In respect of socio-economic issues, Pabla and Mathur point out that the various stages of the Mahaweli Development Program as well as shifting cultivation have caused large-scale destruction of forest cover, which they argue is accentuated by destruction of the buffer zones around PAs as well as new settlers being more indulgent in poaching and other illicit activities. Wijesinha agreed that the conflict primarily involves new settlers, from urban areas. Pabla and Mathur highlight that the DWLC and other agencies have been trying unsuccessfully to fence wild elephants within some PAs. De Vos pointed out that even where there are electric fences around PAs, the electricity is switched off during the day, which the wild elephants are unaware of at present, but are likely to become aware of this in time. Moreover, Wijesinha offered the example where wild elephants have been known to throw and an uprooted tree at an electric fence and then walk over, when tempted by a ripe harvest on the other side of the fence. Furthermore De Vos highlighted that as the resident number of elephants in any particular national park is relatively small, fencing them in will inevitable lead the wild elephants to seek a way out, giving rise to the Human-Elephant Conflict The solution offered by Pabla and Mathur perhaps with a view to the financial constraints faced by the DWLC, was a variation on the fencing solution. They argued that instead of fencing the PAs - not all are fenced - electrical fences should protect the farms instead. However, Mr. Hendavitharana of the DWLC felt that even with an optimistic increase in financial resources, this was not feasible, though he conceded that some large private farms have erected their own fences around their properties. However, De Vos of WNPS argued that given the inherent migratory needs of the wild elephants, particularly male elephants, the survival of the elephant and other wild animals can only be ensured by gradually clearing the corridor areas between the PAs of human habitation. De Vos pointed out that an Asian Development Bank funded pilot project for six years is being considered to develop eco-tourism in the buffer zones around PAs and argued that instead these funds should be used to move humans occupying elephant habitat to land rejuvenated by rehabilitating our ancient tanks. De Vos further argued that the reclaimed elephant corridors or new ones should be at least 1 km in width. Pabla and Mathur also argued that eco-development could assist in reducing the conflict "Eco-development and eco-tourism will I think reduce the Human-Elephant Conflict and correct the people's attitude by increasing the awareness of the people living near the national parks and allow them to participate in their management" said Hendavitharana of the DWLC. This included acceptance by DWLC of Pabla and Mathur's recommendation to encourage the use of fuel-efficient stoves instead of firewood. Hendavitharana also mentioned that an eco-development plan was in the process of being implemented for the Uda Walawe National Park as part of a new strategy in dealing with the conflict. A strategy, which, this writer understood, was still to be finalised. Eco tourism Examples of eco-tourism are the Kandalama Hotel in Dambulla and the Elephant Corridor Hotel in Sigiriya. The latter has been subject to claims that it is invading and obstructing elephant habitat areas. But Prasanna Jayewardene, its owner, refuted these allegations, during a telephone conversation, stating that the name of his hotel does not mean that it is situated in a corridor area and that its operations are in harmony with the natural environment. An example of eco-development success is the paper products sold at Pinnawela Elephant Orphanage. It is made from Elephant dung collected by locals living near wild elephants, who therefore benefit from the existence of the wild elephant. However, De Vos of WNPS argued that tourism is an industry, subject to international factors and therefore we should be more realistic and not place reliance on it, to the detriment of sustainable human and ecological development. Furthermore, De Vos felt that legal encroachment onto the buffer zones in the name of eco-tourism would encourage illegal activities, such as poaching in these areas. De Vos also highlighted that most of the leopards in Yala inhabit the buffer zone and not the park itself.
Moreover, this writer understands that this dam would be constructed with a view to providing that part of the Menik Gange that runs its course through Yala National Park, with a minimum water flow level. There is no such thing as minimum water level, where nature is concerned! In conclusion, this writer feels that in a political culture where self-interest prevails, the human elephant conflict comes right at the bottom. Elephants don't have votes, but humans do! However, one has to be realistic and realise that people now inhabiting the vital corridor areas between PAs and in the buffer zones cannot be expected to move, simply to save the wild elephant, unless an alternative similarly fertile but safe location is offered, such as through renovating our ancient tanks. There will always be those who would argue that Sri Lanka should learn to manage a smaller wild elephant population more effectively. But even this cannot be achieved unless any new policy of the DWLC and other related government departments includes an acceptance of the wild elephants inherent need to migrate between PAs. Immoral On the international front, Alistair Gammell of the UK's Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) in an interview with Alex Kirby of BBC News Online (published 21 May 2003) on the subject of global conservation said that, "It's immoral and impractical to expect the poor to pay for conservation, and it isn't going to happen". He made these comments at the start of a meeting in London on the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity. The BBC News Online report further quoted the RSPB as stating that the countries with the richest biodiversity - (Sri Lanka is placed in number 11 position in world rankings) - are having to struggle to save it because they are so short of money. Alistair Gammell of the RSPB is reported to have called for a substantial transfer of resources from North [Industrialised countries] to South [Developing countries] to fund conservation. Whether this call to transfer financial resources will be accepted by the governments concerned, remains to be seen. For Sri Lanka, the issue here is not just the end of the wild elephant. The wild elephant, as mentioned earlier by Wijesinha of WNPS is a keystone species, which means the elephant ensures the forest does not get overgrown and in times of drought digs small holes in the river bed, both of which assist all the other wild animals. Unless drastic remedial action is taken in the near future, the end of the wild elephant in Sri Lanka will probably come about within ten to fifteen years and a little later it will also lead to the end of most wildlife in Sri Lanka. In a famine the weakest or unattended die first, usually the animals. And where an unsustainable ecological policy operates that results in a human-elephant conflict, it is the wildlife that will die first. And this in country where Prince Mahinda brought to Sri Lanka not only Buddhism but also respect for wildlife resulting in probably the world's first national park at Mihintale. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
by Rohan Canagasabey The tourist influx is due again, beginning this
month. One of the attractions in Sri Lanka, which was also highlighted at
the Destination Sri Lanka event at the BMICH during May in Colombo, was
Sri Lanka's abundant wildlife.
Yala National Park is perhaps touted as another success of eco-tourism,
but Wijesinha felt that the continuous parade of four-wheel vehicles
conveying visitors harms the ecology of the park as well as disturbing the
wildlife there. He argued that 25-seater adapted observation buses would
be more suited in catering for the number of visitors and meeting the
ecological needs of the park. However, Yala National Park is facing
another threat by a proposal in its final stages, according to WNPS, by
the Ministry of Irrigation for a 6 km dam across the Menik Gange, which
would inundate a significant part of the park.
