For every human killed there are four to five elephants killed.
This is deliberate killing.
They grow hashish cordoned by bogus vegetable gardens with political patronage.
For hashish is worth more than the life of an innocent elephant.
All these haapen after the war.
Forest officers have no excuse.
They are actually part of the problem with thier association with corrupt politicians.
In ballot rigging the official calling is "We had a Field Day".
In forest digging, it has to be changed "We had a Forest Day".
That is my addition to English vocabulary.
Sri-Lanka is a "Failed State for the Forest, it will be failed state in the City, soon.
Even LTTE was sensitive to needs of the elephants.
Rate of killing has gone from 175 to 225.
Human-Elephant conflicts
August 11, 2014, 7:31 pm
By By Jayantha Jayewardene
Managing Trustee
Biodiversity & Elephant
Conservation Trust
The conflict between humans and
elephants in Sri Lanka is not only a wildlife problem but also a
major socio-economic and political issue. Crop losses and property
damage from elephant raiding has become a major socio-economic issue
in a larger part of the dry zone and in the south.
In spite of continued and extensive
efforts over the past few decades, by all concerned, especially the
Department of Wildlife Conservation, human-elephant conflicts have
increased in severity and become more widespread.
The human-elephant conflict situation
has emerged as a result of many factors such as reduction of forest
cover, planned and unplanned land based development activities, and
the demand for land from a steadily increasing human and elephant
population during the past few decades.
Another factor is that currently in Sri
Lanka, over 70% of wild elephants live outside the Protected Areas
set up by the Department of Wildlife Conservation.
Annually, 50-60 people and over 225
elephants are killed as a result of this conflict. The deaths of
elephants are due to willful killing by humans whereas some humans
are killed due to their carelessness and bravado.
In the context of human-elephant
conflicts we must remember that the changing economic situation on
the death of the bread winner means that the other spouse or an older
child has to find means to generate income for the affected family.
Going to school becomes a problem to the children of the families.
The Department has not fully focused
its attention to the planned removal of elephants from developed
areas where their presence leads to continuous negative interactions
with people. This has been one of the main causes for the escalation
of human – elephant conflicts. The department has resorted mainly
to ‘fighting fires’ in that they react to a problem when it
surfaces through the media or major objections from the effected
villagers.
Two of the methods adopted by the
Department of Wildlife Conservation to mitigate HEC has been to (1)
remove elephants from outside the Protected Areas by driving the
elephants to other locations and (2) to tranquilize, capture and
transport individual ‘trouble causing’ male elephants to
Protected Areas.
Monitoring of herds restricted to
Protected Areas carried out by researches has shown that most young
die of starvation and that reproduction and recruitment decreases,
making these so called ‘successful’ drives extremely detrimental
to elephant conservation. Elephants are restricted to Protected Areas
where in most instances the food available becomes inadequate for
both the old residents and the newcomers.
Elephant Drives have never been
successful in eliminating elephants totally from an area in that most
adult males and some herds remain. These elephants that remain lose
any fear that they may have had for humans and become even more
aggressive and dangerous. They retaliate to any attempts to drive
them away when raiding crops and show an increased propensity to move
into human habitations. This naturally leads to increased conflicts.
Adult males trans-located by capture
and transport do not remain in the PAs where they are released. Some
return to the capture site, some wander over great distances in a
confused state, some create worse conflict in surrounding areas and
some settle in Forest Department areas
outside the Wildlife Departments
Protected Areas. One such translocated elephant was found swimming in
the sea off Trincomalee and had to be dragged ashore by divers from
the Navy.
It has been proved time and again that
elephant drives and translocations are not effective in the attempt
to mitigate HEC but the Department of Wildlife Conservation persist
in carrying out this as a strategy.
A new approach in mitigating HEC and
conserving elephants is absolutely necessary. A ‘National Policy
for the Conservation and Management of Wild Elephants’ was
formulated by the government in 2006, with the assistance of an
expert committee and adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers. A document
titled ‘Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation and preventing its
Escalation’ was submitted to HE the President in 2010. This too was
prepared by an expert committee. However, no action has been taken to
adopt the decisions and recommendations contained in these two
documents.
The main thrust of the new strategies
that have been suggested in the second report is;
1. Removal of all elephants from
developed areas. Where ‘developed areas’ are identified as
permanent human settlements and crop lands at a relevant scale for
management. This will in effect limit elephants to Elephant
Conservation Areas (ECA).
2. Effective prevention of elephants
entering developed areas by the installment and effective maintenance
of electric fences along the boundary between ECAs and developed
areas.
3. Recognition of chena areas as
Managed Elephant Ranges (MER) with effective regulation of chena
cultivation and provision of communities in MERs with economic
benefits linked to elephant conservation including reasonable
compensation of losses due to elephants. This has to be carried
through pragmatic compensation insurance schemes.
4. Minimizing elephant depredation in
Managed Elephant Reserves by the removal of ‘Problem elephants’.
5. Improving basic needs (Water sources
and managed secondary forests) for the wild elephants inside the PAs
will help to keep them inside.
Advantages to Sri Lanka in effective
elephant management
* Implementing a system of Elephant
Conservation Areas (ECAs) and Managed Elephant Reserves (MERs) will
allow Sri Lanka to continue to maintain the current population of
Asian elephants. This population represents over 10% of the global
population of Asian elephants at a density that is very much higher
than in other Countries.
* Currently Sri Lanka provides the best
opportunities of viewing wild Asian elephants in the world. This is
an as yet untapped market and can provide a significant and
sustainable source of income to the Country.
* It is only in Sri Lanka that one can
view the largest land mammal (elephants at Minneriya) and the largest
marine mammal (Whales at Trincomalee) within two hours.
* Sri Lanka can gain much economic
benefit by promoting tourism based on elephant viewing and their
coexistence with humans. Currently only a small number of tourists
visit Sri Lanka for its wildlife, but Sri Lanka has the potential to
be the premier wildlife tourist destination in Asia and elephants are
an ideal ‘flagship species’ to achieve this.
* Successful mitigation of HEC will
provide relief from a burning socio-economic and political issue that
is also a significant obstacle to alleviating rural poverty.
* In addition, through developing a
system of effective mitigation of HEC and conserving elephants, Sri
Lanka can provide a unique example and leadership to the world, of
how a potentially dangerous and large wild animal can be managed in
the midst of humans, based on the virtues of respect for life and
tolerance which are cornerstones of Sri Lankan culture and religion
