Open Access
Research
(Published
online: 22-07-2016)
12.
A study on the tolerance level of
farmers toward human-wildlife conflict in the forest buffer
zones of Tamil Nadu -
K. Senthilkumar, P. Mathialagan, C. Manivannan, M. G.
Jayathangaraj
and S. Gomathinayagam
Veterinary World, 9(7): 747-752
doi:
10.14202/vetworld.2016.747-752
K. Senthilkumar :
Department of
Wildlife Science, Madras Veterinary College, Tamil Nadu
Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu,
India;
senthilkumar.k.wls@tanuvas.ac.in
P. Mathialagan :
Department of
Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension, Madras Veterinary
College, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University,
Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India;
perumathi@gmail.com
C. Manivannan :
University
Publication Division, Directorate of Distance Education, Tamil
Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Madhavaram Milk
Colony, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India;
manivannan.c@tanuvas.ac.in
M. G.
Jayathangaraj :
Department of
Wildlife Science, Madras Veterinary College, Tamil Nadu
Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu,
India;
mgjayathangaraj@gmail.com
S. Gomathinayagam :
Department of
Veterinary Parasitology, Madras Veterinary College, Tamil Nadu
Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu,
India; sgomathinayagam@yahoo.com
Received: 18-02-2016, Accepted: 11-06-2016, Published online:
22-07-2016
Corresponding author:
K.
Senthilkumar, e-mail: senthilkumar.k.wls@tanuvas.ac.in
Citation:
Senthilkumar K, Mathialagan P, Manivannan C, Jayathangaraj MG,
Gomathinayagam S (2016) A study on the tolerance level of
farmers toward human-wildlife conflict in the forest buffer
zones of Tamil Nadu, Veterinary World, 9(7): 747-752.
Abstract
Aim:
The aim of
this work was to study the tolerance level of farmers toward
different human-wildlife conflict (HWC) situations.
Materials and
Methods:
This study was
conducted in 24 villages of nine blocks from Kancheepuram,
Coimbatore, Erode, and Krishnagiri districts of Tamil Nadu by
personally interviewing 240 farmers affected with four different
HWC situations such as human-elephant conflict (HEC), human-wild
pig conflict (HPC), human-gaur conflict (HGC), and human-monkey
conflict (HMC). A scale developed for this purpose was used to
find out the tolerance level of the farmers.
Results:
In
general, the majority (61.70%) of the farmers had medium level
of tolerance toward HWC, whereas 25.40% and 12.90% belonged to a
high and low category, respectively. The mean tolerance level of
the farmer’s encountering HMC is low (8.77) among the other
three wild animal conflicts. In tackling HWC, the majority
(55.00%) of the HEC farmers drove the elephant once it entered
into their farmland. In the HPC, more than three-fourths of the
respondents drove away the wild pig once they were found in
farmlands. With regard to the HMC, a less number of them (1.70%)
drove the monkey away if monkeys were spotted in their village.
With regard to HGC, 95.00% of the respondents frightened the
gaurs if their family members were threatened by gaurs.
Conclusion:
The
present study suggests that that majority of the farmers had
medium level of tolerance toward HWC. The tolerance level of the
HMC farmers was lower than other three HWC affected farmers.
This study emphasizes the need for necessary training to tackle
the problem in an effective manner for wild animal conservation.
Keywords:
elephant, gaur, human-wildlife conflict, local perceptions,
monkey, tolerance level, wild pig.
References
|
1. Government of Tamil Nadu. (2013) Policy Note on Forest.
Forest Department: 1. |
|
|
|
2. Ministry of Environment and Forests and Climate Change,
Government of India. (2013) Available from: http://www.envfor.nic.in.
Accessed on 18-11-2015. |
|
|
3. Nath, N.K., Dutta, S.K., Das, J.P. and Lahkar, B.P.
(2015) A quantification of damage and assessment of economic
loss due to crop raiding by Asian elephant (Elephas maximus):
A case study of Manas National Park, Assam, India. J.
Threatened Taxa, 7(2): 6853-6863.
http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o4037.6853-63 |
|
|
4. Campbell‐Smith, G., Simanjorang, H.V., Leader‐Williamsm,
N. and Linkie, M. (2010) Local attitudes and perceptions
toward crop‐raiding by orangutans (Pongo abelii) and other
nonhuman primates in northern Sumatra, Indonesia.Am. J.
Primatol., 72(10): 866-876.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20822
PMid:20301138 |
|
|
|
5. Pradhan, V., Dar, M.A., Rather, M.M., Panwar, M. and
Pala, N.A. (2012) Human-wildlife conflict in Kitam bird
sanctuary: Perceptions and possible solutions. Indian
Forest., 138(10): 915. |
|
|
|
6. Perera, B.M.A. (2009) The human-elephant conflict: A
review of current status and mitigation methods. Gajah, 30:
41-52. |
|
|
|
7. Tchamba, M.N. (1993) Number and migration patterns of
savanna elephants (Loxodontaafricana) in Northern Cameroon.
Pachyderm, 16: 66-71. |
|
|
8. Arjunan, M., Holmes, C., Puyravaud, J.P. and Davidar, P.
(2006) Do developmental initiatives influence local
attitudes toward conservation? A case study from the
Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, India.J. Environ.
Manage.,79: 188-197.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.06.007
PMid:16202505 |
|
|
9. Gadd, M.E. (2005) Conservation outside of parks:
Attitudes of local people in Laikipia, Kenya. Environ.
Conserv., 32: 50-63.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892905001918 |
|
|
|
10. Gad, S.D. andShyama, S.K. (2008) Man-wildlife conflict
in protected areas: A case study of gaur Bosgaurus from
BhagvanMahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary and Mollem National Park,
Goa. In: Wildlife Biodiversity Conservation: Proceeding
"National Seminar on Wildlife Biodiversity Conservation",
Pondicherry University. Daya Books, New Delhi, p61. |
|
|
11. Karanth, K.K., Gopalaswamy, A.M., Prasad, P.K. and
Dasgupta, S. (2013) Patterns of human–wildlife conflicts and
compensation: Insights from Western Ghats protected
areas.Biol. Conserv.,166: 175-185.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.06.027 |
|
|
|
12. Varma, S., Avinash, K.G. and Vinay, L. (2011)
Human-Elephant Conflict in Mysore Forest Division: Patterns,
Causes and Responses. Asian Nature Conservation Foundation,
Bangalore. p165. |
|
|
|
13. Chauhan, N.P.S., Barwal, K.S. and Kumar, D. (2009) Human
– Wild pig conflict in selected states in India and
mitigation strategies.Acta Silv. Lign. Hung., 5: 189-197. |
|
|
|
14. Rao, V.V., Naresh, B., Reddy, V.R., Sudhakar, C.,
Venkateswarlu, P. and Rao. D.R. (2015) Traditional
management methods used to minimize wild boar (Susscrofa)
damage in different agricultural crops at Telangana state,
India. Int. J. Multidiscip. Res. Dev., 2(2): 32-36. |
|
|
15. Hill, C.M. and Webber, A.D. (2010) Perceptions of
nonhuman primates in human – wildlife conflict scenarios.
Am. J. Primatol.,72(10): 919-924.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20845
PMid:20806339 |
|
|
|
16. Gunasekaran, S. and Arunachalam, S. (2012) Man versus
monkey. Curr. Sci., 103(7): 760. |
|
|
|
17. Prashanth, P.K.M., Kumara, V. and Thirumala, S. (2013)
Man-animal conflicts in protected areas, a case study of
Gaur, BosGaurus from the Mookambikawildlife sanctuary,
Kollur, Karnataka, India.Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl.
Sci.,2(12): 466-475. |
|
|
18. Sousa, J., Vicente, L., Gippoliti, S., Casanova, C. and
Sousa, C. (2014) Local knowledge and perceptions of
chimpanzees in Cantanhez National Park, Guinea‐Bissau.Am. J.
Primatol., 76(2): 122-134.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ajp.22215
PMid:24123061 |
|
