History, Location, and Species Matter: Insights for Human–Wildlife Conflict Mitigation From India

ABSTRACT

Preventing loss of crops, threats to livestock, damage to property, and human injury and death attributed to wildlife are conservation challenges. We surveyed over 5,000 households around 11 reserves in India to examine these issues and mitigation efforts. Crops were lost by 71% of households, livestock by 17%, and human injury and death were reported by 3% of households (losses attributed to 32 species). Households deployed 12 mitigation measures with nighttime watching, scare devices, and fencing used the most. A household’s conflict history (>20 years for livestock loss, 10–20 years for crop loss), proximity to reserves, and crops grown or livestock owned were associated with higher mitigation use. There were differences across reserves, with households in Rajasthan least likely to use mitigation. Crop protection (88%) was more likely than livestock protection (32%). Investments in conflict mitigation should consider the history, location, species, socioeconomic variations among households, and differences in regional policies.

KEYWORDS:

• Compensation
• conflict
• crop damage
• India
• livestock predation
• mitigation
• wildlife

Acknowledgments

We thank A. Chhatre, R. DeFries, K. U. Karanth, A. Krishna, L. Naughton-Treves, S. K. Nepal, J. Nichols, J. Shah, and E. Weinthal for advice. We are grateful to 140 volunteers who assisted in field work across 11 reserves. We acknowledge M. Amarnath, N. Ballal, S. Dasgupta, H. Dhanwatey, P. Dhanwatey, D. V. Girish, M. Johnson, P. Krishnaprasad, N. S. Kumar, V. Kumar, S. Menon, P. M. Muthanna, N. Patil, R. Patwardhan, Phaniraj, U. Ramakrishnan, A. Srivathsa, A. Srimathi, A. Surendhra and A. Vanamamalai for support at different sites. We are grateful to Wildlife Conservation Society (USA and India), Centre for Wildlife Studies, Columbia University, Duke University, Karnataka Forest Department, Indian Institute of Management Udaipur, Madhya Pradesh Forest Department, Maharashtra Forest Department, Rajasthan Forest Department, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Centre, and officers A. C. Pooviah, B. K. Singh, G. V. Reddy, H. S. Mohanta, H. S. Negi, H. S. Pabla, J. S. Chauhan, and R. Shukla for their support.

Funding

DST Ramanujan Fellowship, National Geographic Society, NSF Grant Number 1029219 and Rufford grants (#9527-1) supported this research.

Additional information

Funding

DST Ramanujan Fellowship, National Geographic Society, NSF Grant Number 1029219 and Rufford grants (#9527-1) supported this research.