Kerala Declared Man-Animal Conflict as State Disaster

Syllabus: GENERAL STUDIES-3
(TECHNOLOGY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BIO-DIVERSITY, ENVIRONMENT, SECURITY AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT)

Why in News

Kerala has taken a pioneering step by becoming the first state in India to declare man-animal conflict, particularly involving elephants, as a state-specific disaster. This decision comes in response to a rise in human fatalities and growing public concern over wild animal attacks.

About

There has been repeated deaths from animal attacks and rising anger over them.
At present, managing man-animal conflict is the responsibility of the forest department, which acts as per the Wild Life Protection Act.
Once the issue is declared a state-specific disaster, the onus to deal with it shifts to the state disaster management authority, which is powered by the Disaster Management Act.

Significance:

Highlighting Severity: This declaration elevates man-animal conflict to a level equivalent to natural disasters, underlining its gravity and potential for widespread disruption.
Streamlined Response: The responsibility for managing conflict shifts from the Forest Department (Wildlife Protection Act) to the State Disaster Management Authority (Disaster Management Act). This facilitates faster decision-making, bypassing bureaucratic hurdles, and potentially saving lives.
Empowered Local Action: District collectors, who head district disaster management authorities, gain greater authority for localized interventions. This enables a more targeted and efficient response to conflicts specific to their areas.
Expedited Action and Legal Protection: The Disaster Management Act allows for quicker action and some legal immunity for authorities taking necessary steps during a declared disaster. This can expedite crucial interventions like tranquilization or capture of problematic animals while reducing concerns over legal challenges.

Expected Outcomes:

Enhanced Public Safety: The aim is to establish a more robust framework for managing man-animal conflict, thereby minimizing human casualties and property damage.
Sustainable Coexistence: This approach seeks to find a long-term solution that balances human settlements with wildlife conservation.

Critical Perspective:

The long-term effectiveness of this strategy hinges on efficient resource allocation, inter-departmental coordination, and community engagement.
Balancing human safety with wildlife protection remains a challenge, and ethical considerations regarding animal welfare need careful evaluation.

Other state-specific Disasters

In 2015, Odisha had declared snakebite a state-specific disaster.
In 2020, Kerala declared Covid as a state specific disaster.
- Besides, heat waves, sunburn and sunstroke have been declared so in 2019.

Human-Wildlife Conflict

Human-wildlife conflict is when encounters between humans and wildlife lead to negative results, such as loss of property, livelihoods, and even life.

Reasons / Factors causing Human-Animal conflict

Human-animal conflict arises from a complex interplay of factors, but here are some key reasons:

Habitat Loss and Fragmentation: Human activities like deforestation, urbanization, and infrastructure development shrink and disrupt wildlife habitats. This forces animals closer to human settlements in search of food and water, increasing the likelihood of encounters.
Resource Competition: As human populations grow, competition for resources like water and grazing land intensifies. This can lead to conflicts with animals, especially herbivores, who may raid crops or compete with livestock.
Poaching and Illegal Wildlife Trade: The illegal hunting and trade of wildlife disrupts animal populations and can make them more aggressive or desperate for food, leading to conflict.
Human-caused Mortality: Road accidents, train collisions, and electrocution by power lines are significant causes of wildlife deaths, impacting population dynamics and potentially leading to retaliatory behavior by remaining animals.
Lack of Awareness and Education: Insufficient public understanding of wildlife behavior and appropriate responses to encounters can heighten tensions and escalate conflicts.
Attraction to Urban Areas: May be drawn to urban areas by easy access to food sources like garbage or human settlements. This increases the likelihood of encounters and potential conflict.

Impacts of Human-Animal conflict

Decline and potential eradication of species.
Financial losses and threats to health and safety, livelihoods, food security, and property.
Displacement and Forced Migration.
Increase in Road and railway accidents due to infrastructure development in forested areas.

Steps Taken by Government to Address Human-Animal Conflict

The Indian government has undertaken several initiatives to mitigate human-animal conflict:

Legislative Framework:

Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: This act forms the legal backbone for wildlife conservation, outlining regulations for protecting endangered species and their habitats.

Species-Specific Programs:

Project Elephant (1992): A centrally sponsored scheme focusing on elephant conservation through habitat management, anti-poaching measures, and conflict mitigation strategies.
Project Tiger (1973): Dedicated to tiger conservation, it establishes protected areas (tiger reserves) and promotes research and anti-poaching activities.

Monitoring and Enforcement:

Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE): Collaborates with CITES to track elephant mortality rates, informing conservation efforts.
Operation Thunderbird: A Wildlife Crime Control Bureau initiative to combat wildlife trafficking and poaching.

Technological Solutions:

Plan Bee: Developed by the Northeast Frontier Railway, this project uses beehives to deter elephants from approaching railway tracks.

Looking Ahead:

Enhanced Awareness: Improved communication and collaboration between forest departments and local communities are crucial for fostering understanding and promoting responsible behavior around wildlife.
Wildlife Corridors: Creating and maintaining corridors allows animals safe passage between habitats, minimizing conflict with human settlements.
Community Participation: Effective solutions require active engagement with affected communities, incorporating their knowledge and needs in conservation plans.
Expanding Protected Areas: Designating additional protected areas provides crucial sanctuaries for wildlife, reducing human-animal interactions.

Additional Measures:

The government can explore other methods:

Physical Barriers: Fences, trenches, and nets can deter animals from entering human settlements.
Early Warning Systems: Alerting communities about potential animal movement can help people take precautions.
Deterrents and Repellents: Using sound, light, or beehives can deter animals without causing harm.
Translocation: In extreme cases, relocating problem animals to safer habitats may be necessary.
Compensation/Insurance: Schemes to compensate for livestock predation or crop damage can alleviate economic hardship for affected communities.
Providing Alternatives: Helping communities develop alternative food sources or livelihood options can reduce dependence on resources that may attract wildlife.

Source: IE