The recent translocation of Arikompan, an elephant from Kerala, to the Kalakkad Mundanthurai Wildlife Sanctuary in Tamil Nadu has brought back into focus the variables that dictate the success of such operations. The attempt is two-fold: to give the elephant a second chance at a life in the wild, and to provide villagers peace of mind from the threat of attacks for food. A key stakeholder is the forest department which sometimes finds it a tightrope walk to keep the good of both animals and humans in mind.
Elephants released in the Mudumalai Tiger Reserve (MTR) in the Nilgiris exemplify the challenges in managing the translocated animals. According to experts, four of the last five elephants released inside the reserve or in the surrounding areas after being captured have either been recaptured or have died.
Three elephants — Vinayagan, Pandalur Makhna-2, and Crowber — were released inside the tiger reserve and were captured by either the Kerala or Karnataka forest departments after crossing the State borders into Wayanad and into the Bandipur Tiger Reserve. Meanwhile, an elephant from Hosur, which was released in Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve (STR) and had made its way into MTR, died after suffering a fall, as it wasn’t familiar with the territory.
The only ‘successful’ translocation in the reserve has been Rivaldo, when the tusker, which had been trapped inside a kraal (elephant shelter) by the forest department for over 100 days, was released in the core area of the tiger reserve.
Though the animal walked over 20 km back to his home range in Mavanallah, in a different part of the relocation area in MTR, Rivaldo has steered clear of households in and around the village, with forest department staff keeping permanent tabs on him throughout the year. Conservationists say Rivaldo was an exception.
Tarsh Thekaekara, a conservationist and founder of The Shola Trust, said translocations and permanently capturing elephants were only “emergency, stop-gap measures” to mitigate negative human-elephant interactions. He says a combination of multiple initiatives, including establishing co-existence areas around elephant habitats, where non-palatable crops such as lime, tea, and coffee are grown, as well as by restoring elephant habitats and removing invasive species like Lantana Camara, which have overrun large parts of prime elephant habitats in the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve (NBR), could help in minimising negative human-elephant interactions.
According to him, policymakers should be more open to the idea of negatively conditioning elephants that stray into farms and human settlements, so the cost of crop raiding outweighs the benefits. “If an elephant begins crop raiding, it needs to be deterred right away. Exactly what and how some actions are taken on individual elephant needs to be decided in a transparent manner, balancing the sensibilities of animal lovers from urban areas and the people on the frontlines, who are being impacted by negative interactions with elephants,” he said. These restrictions on crop raiding must extend for long durations, feels Nilgiris-based conservationist, N. Mohanraj.
Also read | Tackle crisis by checking threat first, says veterinarian who introduced the art of tranquilizing elephants
Mr. Thekaekara said the model adopted towards managing elephants, be it in the wild or in captivity, needs rethinking. “Elephants in the elephant camps are trained using a mixture of force and positive reinforcement based on individual personality, and mahouts should be at the forefront of shaping policies on teaching wild elephants not to damage human property and crops, potentially ensuring that the elephant in question remains a free-ranging animal,” he says.
The best solution is the kindest, and it may benefit some elephants to move them to an elephant camp instead of repeatedly translocating them to different habitats and putting them under immense amounts of trauma, he believes.
