The alarm bell is on human-elephant conflict

The escalating Human-Elephant Conflict (HEC) in Assam is a pointer towards the fact that efforts to secure elephant corridors in the state have not been successful. The spread of HEC hotspots to some new areas indicates more fragmentation of elephant corridors and habitats. The loss of habitats results in a shortage of food and shelter for elephants. The distressing situation compels elephant herds to come out of the forest and raid human settlements in search of food. Pushing infrastructure and connectivity projects in the state for faster progress has led to the diversion of large patches of forest areas, some of which also include elephant corridors. Illegal tree felling by timber smugglers aggravates the loss of forest cover. The cleared jungle patches would soon be encroached upon by the migrant human population, and the expansion of such unauthorised settlements for agriculture and the establishment of villages would lead to an increase in negative interactions between humans and elephants. As humans, mostly poor and marginalised farmers, and elephants are both affected by the conflict, the solutions to mitigate HEC need to focus on the protection of both the affected stakeholders. When an elephant herd raids paddy fields or destroys dwelling houses or granaries, the woes of poor and marginalised farmers are pushed to penury. Human settlements near the forest are remote, and most of the farm families also face difficulty accessing basic amenities like quality education and healthcare. The loss of standing crops in the elephant raid erodes the savings of these families to meet the basic needs of their members, as they are left with no produce to sell and earn. It also affects the capacity of these families to make adequate investments to meet the input costs for the next crop season. Men, women, and children chasing large elephant herds in a bid to protect their crops or prevent destruction of their houses has become more common in affected areas in different parts of the state. Solar-powered electric fences installed in some of the affected villages along the India-Bhutan border have reportedly become effective in protecting crops and dwelling houses from elephant depredation. While the solution has protected the paddy fields, it does not address the root cause of elephant herds coming out of forests. The same herds then range to other unprotected villages in search of food and shelter, and new hotspots of HEC evolve. Nevertheless, protection of the standing crop and the village from elephant raids creates a space for the Forest Department and wildlife activists to explain to the villagers how the destruction of forests aggravated the conflict and why the villagers need to play a pro-active role in the conservation of forests for the sustainability of the solution. The eviction of encroachers from reserved forests is another measure to mitigate the conflict. The eviction helps elephant herds reclaim their lost habitats. However, encroachers often exploit the inability of the forest department to manage effective surveillance owing to a shortage of forest protection forces and re-encroach on the same forest areas. Authorised villages on the fringe of protected forests can play a crucial role as the eyes and ears of the Forest Department and report immediately as soon as they come across any incident of forest encroachment or re-encroachment. Apart from protecting these authorised fringe villages with solar-powered fences from elephant depredation, incentivizing the villagers to provide intelligence against encroachers can prove to be more effective in preventing the destruction of elephant habitats and corridors. Experts have been stressing the need for a landscape-level approach for sustainable solutions to the conflict, as focusing on the hotspots has not produced the desired results. Addressing the hotspots in silos has not brought an end to villagers passing sleepless nights to stand guards and chase raiding elephant herds. Incidents of elephant herds and villagers chasing each other during daylight hours have increased in the affected areas. A landscape-level approach will help with nuanced scrutiny of infrastructure and connectivity projects that involve diversion of forest areas. Re-alignment of these projects to prevent fragmentation of elephant corridors is a rational choice, but project developers are reluctant to adopt it to cut down on construction costs. The regulatory bodies like the National Board of Wildlife and the and the State Board of Wildlife grant the green signal after imposing conditions that project developers pay money for human-animal conflict mitigation, compensatory afforestation, etc. Due to the lack of transparency in the follow-up measures for conflict mitigation, it becomes difficult for experts and wildlife activists to ascertain whether the money has been properly utilized. If the conflict mitigation measures are not properly implemented, the escalation in HEC is a natural consequence. The state has about 5,700 elephants. If the HEC escalation is not checked, it is only a matter of time before this population will become extinct. The rising incidents of HEC have pressed the alarm bell for the government to initiate stronger measures to check the conflict and protect the surviving population of endangered species from habitat loss.