Conflict between human and wildlife

Ø   INTRODUCTION

Human–wildlife conflict refers to the interaction between wild animals and people and the resultant negative impact on people or their resources, or wild animals or their habitat. It occurs when growing human populations overlap with established wildlife territory, creating reduction of resources or life to some people and/or wild animals. The conflict takes many forms ranging from loss of life or injury to humans, and animals both wild and domesticated, to competition for scarce resources to loss and degradation of habitat.

Conflict management strategies earlier comprised lethal control, translocation, regulation of population size and preservation of endangered species. Recent management approaches attempt to use scientific research for better management outcomes, such as behavior modification and reducing interaction. As human-wildlife conflicts inflict direct, indirect and opportunity costs, the mitigation of human-wildlife conflict is an important issue in the management of biodiversity and protected areas.

Ø  History

Human–wildlife conflicts have occurred throughout man's prehistory and recorded history. Amongst the early forms of human-wildlife conflict is the predation of the ancestors of prehistoric man by a number of predators of the Miocene such as saber-toothed cats, leopards, spotted hyenas amongst others.

Fossil remains of early hominids show evidence of predation; the Taung Child, the fossilized skull of a young Australopithecus Africans, is thought to have been killed by an eagle from the distinct marks on its skull and the fossil having been found amongst egg shells and remains of small animals.
A Plio-Pleistocene horned crocodile, Crocodiles anthropophagus, whose fossil remains have been recorded from Olduvai Gorge, was the largest predator encountered by prehistoric man, as indicated by hominid specimens preserving crocodile bite marks from these sites.
The advent of farming and animal husbandry of the Neolithic Revolution increased the scope of conflict between humans and animals. The crops and the produce formed an abundant and easily obtained food source for wild animals. Wild herbivores competed with domesticated ones for pasture. In addition, they were a source for diseases which affected livestock. The livestock attracted predators which found them an easy source to prey on. The inevitable human reaction was to eliminate such threats to agriculture and domesticated animals. In addition, land was converted to agricultural and other uses and forests cleared, all of which impacted wild animals adversely. A number of animal species were eliminated locally or from parts of their natural range. The deliberate or accidental introduction of animals in isolated island animal communities have caused extinction of a large number of species.

Ø Nature of human-wildlife conflicts

·      Causes

As human populations expand into wild animal habitats, natural wildlife territory is displaced. Reduction in the availability of natural prey/food sources leads to wild animals seeking alternate sources. Alternately, new resources created by humans draw wildlife resulting in conflict. The population density of wildlife and humans increase with overlaps in geographical areas used increasing their interaction thus resulting in increased physical conflict. Byproducts of human existence offer un-natural opportunity for wildlife in the form of food and sheltered interference and potentially destructive threat for both man and animals. Competition for food resources also occurs when humans attempt to harvest natural resources such as fish and grassland pasture. Another cause of conflict comes from conservation biased toward flagship or game species that often threatens other species of concern

·      Outcomes of conflict

Asian elephant damages to houses
Human–wildlife conflict occurs with various negative results. The major outcomes of human-wildlife conflict are:
• Injury and loss of life of humans and wildlife
• Crop damage, livestock depredation, predation of managed wildlife stock.
• Damage to human property.
• Trophic cascades.
• Destruction of habitat.
• Collapse of wildlife populations and reduction of geographic ranges.
One of the initiators of the concept of man-animal conflict was Das and Guha. They described the two-sided impacts of this conflict. From one side, the source of conflict is the restriction on the local people to access forest resources. On the other side, the source of conflict is the damage incurred to them by wild animals.

Ø   Hidden Dimensions of Conflict

Human wildlife conflict also has a range of 'hidden' dimensions that are not typically factored in when the focus is on visible impacts. These can include health impacts, opportunity and transaction costs. Case studies include work on elephants in northeast India, where elephant-man interactions are seen to lead to cases of increased imbibing of alcohol by crop guardians with resultant enhanced mortality in encounters., and issues related to gender in northern India.

Ø   Conflict resolution or management

A traditional livestock corral surrounded by a predator-proof corral in South Gobi Desert, Mongolia, to protect livestock from predators like snow leopard and wolf.
The aim of conflict resolution or management is to reduce the potential for human-wildlife conflicts in order to protect life and limb, safety and security of animal populations, habitat and general biodiversity, and also to minimize damage to property. The preference is always for passive, non-intrusive prevention measures but often active intervention is required to be carried out in conjunction.

Ø   Management techniques

Ecotourism by elephant safari through the Jaldapara Wildlife Sanctuary in West Bengal, India.
Management techniques of wildlife are of two types. The first type are the traditional techniques which aim to stop, reduce or minimize conflict by controlling animal populations in different ways. Lethal control has the longest history but has major drawbacks. Other measures, less costly in terms of life, are trans-location, regulation and preservation of animal populations. Modern methods depend upon the ecological and ethological understanding of the wildlife and its environment to prevent or minimize conflict; examples being behavioral modification and measures to reduce interaction between humans and wildlife.
Potential solutions to these conflicts include electric fencing, land use planning, community-based natural resource management (CBNRM), compensation, payment for environmental services, ecotourism, wildlife friendly products, or other field solutions.
In efforts to reduce human-wildlife conflict, World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) has partnered with a number of organizations to provide solutions around the globe. Their solutions are tailored to the community and species involved. For example, in Mozambique, communities started to grow more chili pepper plants after making the discovery that elephants dislike and avoid plants containing capsaicin. This creative and effective method prevents elephants from trampling community farmers' fields as well as protects the species.

Ø   Preventing human-wildlife conflict

reduced, people and wildlife are increasingly coming into conflict over living space and food.
It might be baboons in Namibia attacking young goats, or elephants in Nepal eating crops, or European bears and wolves killing livestock. The problem is universal, affects rich and poor, and is bad news for all concerned.
The impacts are often huge. People lose their crops and livestock (and therefore a source of income and food security), property, and sometimes their lives - even a severe injury caused by wildlife can result in a loss of livelihood. The animals, some of which are already threatened or even endangered, are sometimes killed in retaliation or to prevent future conflicts.
Human-wildlife conflict is happening more and more, affecting a lot of different species. The effects of climate change will probably make the problem worse.

Ø   The government is working to reduce human-wildlife conflict

• We properly manage attractants in parks, solid waste facilities, campgrounds, highway rest stops and more.

• We educate residents and visitors about best practices for avoiding human-wildlife conflict.

• We consider the impact of new developments on wildlife in decision-making and permitting.

• We work with businesses and individuals to ensure their activities are aimed at reducing conflicts with wildlife, especially for those who work or play in the wild.

Ø   Common human-wildlife conflict

Human-wildlife conflict is any contact between humans and wildlife that causes harm to the person, animal or property. Property includes buildings, equipment, camps, livestock and pets.

• Bears, wolves, coyotes, cougars, foxes and porcupines roaming in residential areas.

• Predation of livestock or pets.

• Elk, caribou, moose, deer, sheep, goats or bison damaging crops and fences.

• Beavers causing flooding.

• Wildlife accessing improperly stored garbage, compost or recycling.

• Wildlife living in or around residences.

• Vehicle-wildlife collisions.

Ø   Reason Behind the Human Interaction

Deforestation
Loss of Habitat
Decline in Prey
Injured or Old Animal
Growing Human Population

Ø   Results of Human Wildlife Conflict

         Crop Damage
               Animal Deaths
               Loss of Human Life
               Injuries to People
               Injuries to Wildlife
               Livestock Depredation

Ø   Solutions to Reduce Human Interaction and Wildlife Conflict

             Fencing
                     Land-Use Planning
                     Livestock Protection
                     Avoid stepping out After Dark

Ø   CONCLUSIONS

The world is currently dealing with a dramatic rise in poaching and wildlife trafficking that threatens to overum decades of conservation gains. Yet today's wildlife trafficking crisis also threatens the security of human beings. It does so in ways often ignored by law enforcement and other security agencies skow to overcome institutional and mindset barriers to treating what has traditionally been labelled a conservation issue as a serious crime with negative impacts on human wellbeing. However, there are signs that this state of affairs is changing. Wildlife trafficking is no longer confined exclusively to the domain of widlife authorities who are ll equipped o handle its complexities Although wildlife trafficking is still viewed in some source and transit countries as a regulatory issue best dealt with by park wardens, rangers and conservation scientists, in others it is increasingly incorporated into the purviews of security agencies.  This progress as come as the UN Security Council, alongside numerous other bodies, has acknowledged the links between poaching, wildlife trafficking, transnational organised crime and security. It has also occurred as major intemational donors have begun to take the security dimensions of poaching and wildlife trafficking more seriously. In 2013, the Clinton Global Initiative announced an $80-million action plan combat poaching and wildlife trafficking, with particular emphasis on their security dimensions (although the Clinton Foundation itself provided to no new funding, with the vast majority of the pledged funds comprising the aleady-funded budgets of a range of conservation organisations)