Relief disbursal up, not human animal conflict: Experts

Maqsood Maniyar | NT

Bengaluru: Karnataka Forest Department recorded a yearly increase of 8,423 cases in the number of compensation claims being reimbursed, but wildlife biologists cautioned that it may not necessarily mean an uptick in human-animal conflict.

They held that the rise in the number of disbursals could be the result of better management by the administration. The Wildlife Division of the Karnataka Forest Department disbursed relief for 36,982 human-animal conflict claims in 2021-22, compared to 28,559 in 2020- 21.

The amount handed out stood at Rs 2,741.62 lakhs, up from Rs 2,164.10 lakhs a year prior. The conflict cases include instances of human deaths, permanent disability, pensions for the two aforementioned categories, injury, crop damage, property loss, and cattle killed.

As many as 40 people who died of the animal attacks were compensated in 2021-22, as compared to 36 in 2020-21. Crop damage made up the majority of cases and stood at 31,255, up from 24,740 a year ago.

However, the data covers 15 out of the 27 districts of Karnataka. Wildlife biologist and CEO of Metastring Foundation Ravi Chellam, said that neither the numbers nor the perception of animals being sighted near human settlements proved an increase in humananimal conflict.

“It could well mean they are doing a better job of paying compensation. It might not be a reflection of any trend in the conflict,” he said. “Just seeing an animal isn’t conflict. You see it once. They come probably 100 times when you haven’t seen them. You shouldn’t go and disturb them. Capturing animals is not a solution. You capture the animal. What are you going to do with it? You either have to keep it in captivity or release it somewhere.

Almost always when you release an animal like that, it either dies or creates conflict,” he added. He insisted that India was famous for humans and animals co-existing. He also termed measures like elephant-proof trenches (EPTs) “a civil engineering solution to an ecology problem.”

Ecologist and wildlife biologist MD Madhuswamy said that he had noticed cases where stricter forest officials led to fewer ex-gratia claims being accepted, while more forthcoming officers ensured far more applications translated to compensation.

“The total number of compensations paid and other kinds of totals is an unreliable measure of what’s going in conflict, especially when things are happening on a large spatial scale,” he said. “It’s hard to say if it is because of an active increase in conflict or the result of some administrative or category change,” he added.

‘Many reasons behind it’

Wildlife biologist Nitin Sekar said that the major reasons why human-animal conflicts occur include issues like deforestation, degradation of habitat, reduction in water availability due to climate change and anything that makes habitat less hospitable to wildlife, which makes them seek sustenance near human settlements.

Other reasons include animals being tempted to seek food and water in human areas and lastly, the growth of human and/or human populations. “Governments should consult with experts, and they really do quite a bit. I do wish governments would embrace a more data-oriented approach to managing conflict. But again, many officials are trying, and it probably is just a matter of time before management of conflict becomes far more systematic than it is now,” he said.