Asian Elephants: Some memories, some questions.

This piece finds place in the Deccan Herald on 16^th February 2016.

Link to the edited version on Deccan Herald site here.

Many thanks to Deccan Herald, Anitha and Dharmendra.

Memories of days in Garo Hills (Meghalaya) came forth; learning of elephants, coming across elephant dung at places one never thought they could go to, of talking with people who lived amongst elephants and more. Meghalya is one of the 16 elephant bearing states and the Garo Hills population stands at approximately 1,700.  India today has approximately 30,000 elephants; and as we lose wildlife habitats the species move to newer lands. Elephant human conflict today is increasing both in intensity and spread. Every once in a few months news of elephants run over by a train or electrocuted remind us of this! I was at a 2 day meet on Asian Elephants, focusing on Assam and neighbouring states, to discuss the concerns and chalk out a way ahead. Deliberations helped raised multiple questions.

Disappearing populations. That we seldom – if at all – discuss these disappearing populations of Asian Elephants astonishes me. If we look at Mizoram we have one female in Dampa Tiger Reserve since past few years. The population in Saiha had come down to one about a decade ago and remained thus for a few years till the individual crossed Kaladan (Kolodyne) during the dry months and moved on to Lawngtlai (Ngengpui Wildlife Sanctuary).  The irony of it - Saiha in local language means elephant teeth; ivory. Ngengpui today is home to the only herd in the state and the number is not more than 20. We have surely lost Asian Elephants from other landscapes in the region as well during the recent past. But, strangely, these vanishing populations do not seem to get the attention they warrant!

                                                     Image: Dharmendra Khandal

Jhum. As we discuss elephants in these states we invariably come to jhum (shifting cultivation). Do we continue to make suggestions on weaning people away from jhum without sufficient clarity on what these would entail to? Have we thought about the alternatives adequately? Alternatives that are friendly to both: local ecology and livelihood of the people. In Garo Hills this ‘weaning away from jhum’ had crops like cashew and rubber, carpet the region. As a consequence the habitat was wiped out! That these crops increased people’s dependence on uncertainties of market forces and posed the challenge of food-security is another discussion. Today, when science of the day appears to have finally accepted (albeit partially) that jhum retains significant biodiversity values, what exactly are the alternate land uses that we are encouraging?

Research. Consultations veered on to managing an elephant landscape in a scientific manner. Data, analysis and findings were presented to the effect. I was curious on how this would translate to action on ground. In other words how – if at all - was this learning shared and discussed with other stake holders in the landscape and as a corollary put to use in day-to-day management? The factors assumed constant in studies of this nature were confusing. Could we - for example – assume human responses to be constant? Interestingly none of the multiple participants who shared their experiences with elephant – human conflict and measures taken towards mitigation shared of basing their efforts on science based findings. I wonder if the chasm between research and action has deepened with time and whether science was a luxury when one was taking up fire-fighting measures in high conflict zones.

Kaziranga National Park. If one is discussing elephants in the region one has to talk of Kaziranga. There were questions like how much food and water we need for the approximately 1,200 elephants at Kaziranga? Did we have a picture of the natural resources there? Why are we not good at managing success? Success in terms of increasing numbers of large mammals – be it Asian Elephants, Wild Water Buffaloes or One Horned Rhinos. The last question left me wondering. The numbers have spiralled and Kaziranga – at this point - has managed to rise successfully like few others. But, are numbers the only measure of success? Do we also look at habitat in the entire Kaziranga landscape? Have we succeeded at sustainable conservation of the ecosystem?

Image: Dharmendra Khandal

Agreements and disagreements. Attempts to understand elephant – human conflict and address the same were put forth. Some focussed more on technology centric solutions and others on people based approaches. The mention of growing crops for elephants with a view to reduce conflict was met with surprise. While the opinion that India will need to either capture or cull elephants in certain landscapes bearing high levels of conflict – there was no other way given that the populations had risen - was enthusiastically contested. The suggestion on investing efforts in tea-garden tourism for elephant conservation left me confused. Why do we, despite learning to contrary, look at tourism as solution to conservation problems in varied landscapes and scenarios? Also possibly, Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) may again be implemented in the country. I recalled our experiences in Garo Hills; we had reported 6 deaths in as many months and it had not gone down well with a section in the forest department that contested them; and how.

There were then couple of lines that have since stayed with me. Corridors were referred to as ‘accidents of geography’ and economy as ‘being the driving force in the landscapes’. What hit me though was the statement ‘We need to take action, do something more’. What was it that was left unsaid and more critical? Especially given that it came from an experienced hand associated with a large set-up. Was there reference towards better channelizing of conservation resources or the need to take up activities in the nature of litigation to save the remaining patches of habitat? What he stated outside the room was equally - if not more - stark ‘there is very little connect between meetings like this and the situation on ground’. Another interesting line was ‘we need to move beyond data’. Was he talking of changing the narrative or looking at the conflict from a livelihood perspective? Of documenting not in numbers, but in stories to get the entire picture?

How crucial it is – I wondered – to rope in other stake-holders and make a move away from the generic towards the specific. Asian Elephant is one of our more studied and discussed species; we need to get on to the nuances. Do we also need to look at the connections? At our lifestyles and their impact on the elephant bearing landscapes. At the number of plastic water bottles we had trashed in course during the two days for example?

There were no answers. These discussions though are needed; the dialogue is crucial.