|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 28 September 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Human-elephant conflict : Learning to co-exist by Rohan Canagasabey The need for humans to co-exist with wild elephants and other species and to ensure continued global biodiversity, was the predictable consensus that emerged from the International symposium on biodiversity and human elephant relationships and conflicts, that concluded last Sunday at the Colombo Plaza.
The 60 or so papers presented by the 130 delegates from Sri Lanka, the USA, Western Europe, Africa and Asia brought some new and innovative ideas and experiences to the fore. This was particularly true in efforts at mitigating the Human Elephant Conflict (HEC) as well as conservation. The HEC is a phenomenon experienced in varying degrees in the continents of Asia and Africa. The holding of this symposium benefited the research projects being conducted in Sri Lanka, as several of the international delegates had the opportunity to visit these sites, either before or after the symposium. The local officials of the Department of Wildlife and Conservation (DWLC) assisted in these projects. The symposium was presented by the International Elephant Foundation (of the USA) and the Biodiversity and Elephant Conservation Trust (of Sri Lanka). This article will concentrate on the presentations made with particular reference to Sri Lanka in mitigating the HEC and wild elephant conservation. To briefly mention the HEC in Sri Lanka, statistics from the DWLC reveal that the HEC in Sri Lanka claims the lives of approximately 60 humans and 150 elephants per year. Apart from the tragic loss of human life, mostly that of farmers, continued intensity of the HEC would pose a serious threat to the survival of the wild elephant in Sri Lanka. This in turn will have an impact on the viability of other wildlife, as the elephant is a keystone species and is critical to the management of its habitat. Innovative measures
As 50% of Sri Lanka's approximately 3,000 wild elephants live or range outside protected areas, protection measures where humans live in close proximity to elephants is vital to reduce crop and property damage incidents, as well as the fatalities, both human and elephant. The Elephant Detection Project (EDP)1 (of Sri Lanka) presented a very successful detection system, in relation to crop protection, put into place in one of their four test village sites at Gal Oya. A trip wire was used that sounded a buzzer to alert the farmer. Then methods such as making noise, perhaps with firecrackers are used to chase the elephant away. The success rate was initially 15 detections out of 18 attempted crop raids by elephants, while in the next season, 15 out of 15 were detected. This team also presented as yet unfinished research into measuring infrasounds - sound levels below human hearing - emitted by elephants to each other, as a means of detecting wild elephant proximity. Community participation However, the EDP emphasised during their presentation that community participation was essential for the success of any project to succeed in mitigating the HEC. Community participation is at the core of the Saving Elephants By Helping People (SEHP) project being run by the Sri Lanka Wildlife and Conservation Society (SLWCS) in two villages in the Wasgomuwa region. SLWCS have put into practice the ecologically friendly concept of fencing elephants out rather than within protected areas. Moreover they have also involved the local community from the planning stage to its implementation, in what SLWCS called "a bottom to top management process". The villages have greatly benefited from the electric fences around them, powered by solar power, to the extent that it has almost eliminated the HEC. Cost analysis of all factors revealed that the fence paid for itself within three years. Though the villagers themselves continue to live in a debt cycle, some of the village youth have been incorporated into the field research work and were part of the delegation at the symposium. However, SLWCS were disappointed to discover that once the HEC had been virtually eliminated, there was no long-term commitment from the villagers to maintaining the fence. SLWCS has therefore engaged a social scientist to conduct research and put forward the findings, in a bid to ensure the long-term self-sufficient survival of the SEHP project. SLWCS argued that Community Integrated or Participatory conservation projects mean working for villagers rather than with villagers. Conservation One of the issues that was consistently emphasised, during the symposium, was the need for elephant migration between protected areas (national parks, forest reserves and sanctuaries) to be facilitated through either the maintenance or renewed establishment of human-habitation free corridors. The habitats themselves, in Sri Lanka, as in the rest of Asia, and Africa, have suffered from shrinkage and fragmentation. The conventional wisdom in this respect has held that elephants migrate great distances during seasonal variations and therefore a chain of corridors connecting protected areas, as existed up until the 1970s in Sri Lanka, is the ideal means by which the elephant can be preserved in the wild. Presentations countering some of these conventional held theories were given by the Elephant Research Project (ERP)3 (of Sri Lanka). The first was titled Ranging behaviour and habitat use of elephants in Sri Lanka. Their studies, using 18 elephants collared with VHF transmitters and conducted over two years, was based on two sites, Kahalle in the north-west and the better known Ruhuna/Yala and Uda Walawe national parks, in the south-east. The monitoring revealed that in the smaller Kahalle protected area, wild elephants have ranges which extend beyond it, whilst in Yala, home ranges vary from entirely within the national park to that which include it and beyond the adjacent buffer zone. Therefore, ERP concluded that habitat availability is the main factor that determines the size of the home range of elephants that range outside protected areas. In respect of the DWLC plan to erect an electric fence around the administrative boundary of Yala, the ERP argues that the fence should include the buffer zone and the adjacent area beyond, all of which fall within elephants' ecological boundary. The ERP also argued that translocating elephants to national parks - done in the past in Sri Lanka, but with only a 50% success rate, with the other 50% returning to their original habitat - increases the pressure within the destination to unnatural levels and may threaten the survival of all the elephants there. Their conclusions were that in Sri Lanka, elephants do not have long-range migratory patterns, even during seasonal variations, and instead range within broad areas, such as south-east, north-west, and consequently, the remaining Mahaweli region. This was backed up by genetic analysis within the two study areas, which revealed differences in the DNA, which would counter any arguments that these range patterns are recent developments over the last few decades, in response to human encroachment and development of elephant habitat. In respect of corridor areas, the ERP academics recommended that these are provided, where necessary, to encompass the often overlapping home ranges, rather than for example, as suggested elsewhere, to provide a thin corridor between Wilpattu in the north-west, linking the protected areas along the way to ones in the East. ERP advocated the use of broad corridors where chena (rotational) cultivation can take place, with farmers residing outside this area. An area that would be divided into several blocks with only a few - protected by electric fences and any other crop protection measures - being cultivated at any one time. New strategy The elephant research project argued that a corridor of this nature connecting Lunuganwehera sanctuary with Yala national park, would be an example of how to co-exist with the wild elephant, as they also prefer to feed on land that was previously cultivated. This was part of the ERP team's final presentation on achieving a Scientific Elephant Management and Conservation Strategy and was highly commended by the international delegates assembled at the symposium. Meanwhile SLWCS argued that a more "holistic" approach is needed to address and resolve most of these issues. This they said would mean taking into consideration the villagers, elephants, field scientists, conservationists, and even tourists to develop a sustainable approach for the long-term resolution of HEC and the long-term conservation of the elephant. In Sri Lanka, and many other countries, shortage of funds is often cited as a reason for hindering conservation. A novel approach is green hunting at Timbavati Private Nature Reserve in South Africa. A hunter paying US $25,000 is allowed to hunt an elephant with a tranquilliser gun. The elephant is then fitted a satellite collar that provides vital information in assisting conservation as well as generating income for the reserve. The organisers of the symposium will publish the academic papers presented within a few weeks. Whether the relevant government minister or the top officials of the DWLC, who regrettably were unable to attend the symposium, will take note and act accordingly, remains to be seen. The symposium though ended on a high note, with an agreement to draft a communique to the United Nations, seeking the establishment of international body, similar to the Whale Commission, to ensure the survival of the wild elephant, both in Asia and Africa. As the delegate who suggested this motion pointed out, it would also assist in conserving habitat and biodiversity, which in turn will assist with reducing the effects of global warming. And reducing the adverse effects of global warming should be of interest even to those who are indifferent about the plight of wildlife, as one cannot escape the reality that nature and humanity need to co-exist! |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
