The distressing incident of a tiger killing a farmer and devouring part of the cadaver in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district highlights the need for scientific efforts to reduce conflicts between people and wild animals. Encounters between tigers and humans are likely to occur in less than one per cent of the country's geographical area today. Tiger numbers have dwindled because they were hunted down either as dangerous vermin that stood in the way of expansion of agriculture or as prized trophies. In spite of legal protection, poaching remains a threat. Also, habitat capable of supporting the large cats has shrunk and become increasingly fragmented. Yet some communities living close to forests face conflicts. It is important to understand that man-eating is not a widespread phenomenon, and the species generally avoids human encounters. Some tigers do get involved in opportunistic attacks and may begin stalking humans as normal prey. Man-eating is more common in the Sunderbans, where such attacks are often by more than one tiger. The answer to this human-tiger conflict lies in good conservation science and in mitigation measures that help people co-exist with the carnivores at the landscape level.
To many scientists, the most effective interventions to achieve a reduction in attacks by tigers are those designed to eliminate human pressures on the habitat. Relocation of people from tiger territory with handsome compensatory packages is a superior alternative to crisis management techniques that invariably follow attacks. Problems in voluntary relocation such as lack of alternative land, corruption, and cultural factors do persist, but suitable incentives can persuade more forest residents to move out. It may still be necessary to use lethal methods to remove some problem tigers in order to avoid widespread retaliatory actions by villagers. Protective fencing of habitations is sometimes advocated, but as studies by independent and Project Tiger researchers show, encounters take place mostly in free-ranging situations, particularly in forests where villagers graze livestock. All this makes it clear that it is vital to maintain a strong prey base within the habitat. This can ensure that wild tigers do not seek out cattle. Connectivity between forest fragments free of habitations also needs to be ensured. India now has far fewer tigers than leopards. Unlike the spotted cats, they do not adapt themselves well to the presence of humans nearby. Both species are involved in conflicts, but tigers are less resilient. Creating wider undisturbed habitat will benefit both.
Keywords: tiger-human conflict, farmer's death, man-eaters, Sunderbans, Yavatmal
Agreed with Shrajal- We can only claim so much of the earth until there is nothing left. And while we are intelligent beings, we aren't so smart in that we continue to pollute the earth, continue to overpopulate, continue with deforestation and continue with the worldwide obsession of capitalism, industrialization and greed. Tigers are meant to be wild. All animals that we see in the zoo, are meant to be in the wild. But because of the human need to claim land and pollute waters, many of the animals in zoos must be there or they would be extinct. This is OUR wrongdoing. There is no denying this. We have tampered with the ecosystem, and this was the result. And considering how most humans treat each other, I prefer animals over humans.
Everyone need their own space to live and this principle is universal. This is the special issue where humans are claiming on the tigers for their conflicts. It sounds odd when ear drum vibrated by human sound saying-"We need space to live". It is we who are responsible for the increement of our population and after that claiming that we need some space. I wonder how can we say that? We are in billions and tigers are in hundreds or at the maximum in thousands. Who should be responsible for it?? We have covered 3/4th of the land, rest is covered by water, so where do the animals live? We are humans and have perfect human tendency but we should not forget that our future generation is also coming in the due course of time and if tigers are not preserved with utmost care, then they would blame you and say-" You were mindless creatures".
Well said. Relocation is not a solution this. We have enough tiger reserves in India. If any indication that a tiger is seen in human habitant area red alert can be given to the people to be careful while roaming interiors and rescue team can jump in and move the cat to the reserve. We can try to adopt some efficient trends that other countries are following for rescue. In case of relocation, more than half of the compensation will be eaten away by our human tigers.
Indeed the answer to minimize conflict lies in science of good conservation. Appropriate technologies like GPS trackers and help lines or alarms can be induced in habitat areas but relocation is last step to be considered,no incentives and compensations are worth and moreover the hope of delivery of these incentives is comparatively low.sentiments and culture of the inhabitants must be respected.
The people cannot relocate.Lot of tribal families live in the forest are dependents on forest itself for their living. There are many animal parks available in india example: Deer park at tirumala(in Tirupati-Andhra pradesh) There are more than 100 deers available...if the governament can organise such parks to save tigers it is good... We are humans with high intelligence we not only save ourselves but also other living things...
The need to protect the tigers is indeed great. But people sometimes tend to overlook the need to protect themselves or their fellow men from the same ferocious animals. The priority should be the same for both and not more for the former than the latter.
Relocation of people from a place which belongs to such big cats is a better way and also a handsome package must be given to that population like rehabilitation. It will reduce the conflict between man and carnivores and other species. We change them from flesh-eaters to man- eaters and we must change what we did to these creatures.
Government has a greater role to play when it comes to saving wildlife species.Government policies are not aligned to it.They support industrialisation and deforestation in order to sustain the growth without thinking about the effect on wild life species.They should ponder on this in order to avoid frequent conflict of wildlife animals with human being. Every one has right to live.So,If wild animals distrubed in their habitat by people then it causes an adverse effect on them.Human interference in their habitat should be avoided in order to reduce such incidents
If India's population reaches 2 billion plus, forests automatically vanish and wildlife confined to zoo alone. Therefore sincere efforts by all concerned only can help quality population growth and a happy coexistence with wildlife and environment. Tribals can not live on govt. doles and live with eternal illeracy & poverty forever. To change is a quite natural and they too should adapt themselves to the new situations and development.Tribals of NE India are a genious lot and must be taken in confidence for India to become a developed nation. Let experts think and do best in national interest.
The real predators lie in the heart of city whereas the poor people and tigers are at loggerheads. people must be protected from wild animals by the government. Towards that end, deforestation and the unbridled exploitation of forest resources and tribals need to be checked.
People and Tigers have co-existed for centuries in this country. Dont go by these western models of conservation of inviolate areas. No compensation is good enough. People should never be relocated. These relocation packages does not solve livelihoods issues neither it helps in protecting the tiger.
People have lived in those lands as tribals and forest dwellers for ages. That has to be respected. Only if people remain, the tiger will also be there, else tiger will be history. The Hindu continues its biased analysis of tiger conservation approaches by pushing the conventional conservation mantra of 'relocation', 'eliminate human pressures' and 'suitable incentives' to 'persuade more forest residents to move out'. This is not at all acceptable.
All those scientists who are asking for these inviolate areas have got their degrees based on the knowledge they got from tribals and indigenous people. People should never be relocated.
The Hindu continues its biased analysis of tiger conservation approaches by pushing the conventional conservation mantra of 'relocation', 'eliminate human pressures' and 'suitable incentives' to 'persuade more forest residents to move out'. Although the editorial sings its now familiar paeans to 'good conservation science', it does not attempt to interpret the science adequately. Even a cursory study of wildlife biology literature will tell us that tigers are territorial animals, and that it is not the availability of prey within protected areas alone that pushes animals out but the failure of adult tigers to maintain territories when tiger numbers increase. The effort to 'pack' tigers into protected areas is therefore doomed to fail if we do not simultaneously plan to deal with animals that are unable to maintain territories within forests. Rather than offer a thoughtful analysis of a complex problem, the editorial resorts to the old, tired and received argument for inviolate areas.
The land acquisition policies and the implementing procedures of the government also indirectly contribute to the human pressure on the habitats of wild life. The diversion of vast tracts of land to corporate giants involving corruption and selfish gain triggers a mass exodus of sorts of the deprived to the forest ranges. The migrant settlers resort to gross clearnce of the hills and hillocks reducuing the living space of the wild animals. A check on such noxious steps by the State is the need of the hour and it would benefit both the humans and the animals.
Please Email the Editor