The assessment of the data obtained suggests that HWC has been on the rise in Kerala over the years. The different types of HWC interactions such as property and crop damage, cattle loss and human injury were found to be on a rising trend.
HWC case applications in Kerala reported a surge from a total of 6022 applications in 2015-16 to 10036 applications in 2021-22. A gradual rise in the number of applications could be observed (Fig. 2) where the number increased for almost all types of conflicts other than human death.
There is a gradual increase in the number of cases of property and crop damage, and cattle loss. A sharp rise is observed in the number of cases of human injury from 409 cases in 2015-16 to 1405 cases in 2021-22 (Table 1). At the same time, the number of cases of human death seems to be relatively stable.
The rise in the number of cases could be due to an increase in wildlife populations as a result of successful conservation initiatives undertaken by the Kerala Forest and Wildlife Department. In addition to this, the rise could also be attributed to a growing awareness among people regarding the need for reporting and filing instances of HWC as a way to obtain compensation for the losses suffered by the people through the conflict.
Table 1
Table 1
The number of cases of human-wildlife conflict from 2015-16 to 2021-22
Type of Conflict | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 |
Property and Crop Damage | 5154 | 6461 | 5703 | 6631 | 8650 | 7896 | 7884 |
Cattle Loss | 355 | 361 | 561 | 348 | 472 | 488 | 615 |
Human Injury | 409 | 798 | 846 | 765 | 1239 | 1239 | 1405 |
Human Death | 104 | 145 | 119 | 146 | 122 | 111 | 132 |
Total | 6022 | 7765 | 7229 | 7890 | 10483 | 9734 | 10036 |
Figure 2
Another factor that might have contributed to a rise in HWC could be the ongoing pandemic that forced people to stay indoors, which had an effect on initially reducing the number of people outdoors who would run into and disturb wildlife. The wildlife thus found it favourable to invade areas that had less human population and more resources to exploit, such as agricultural fields and plantations, which would eventually lead to conflicts such as crop damage, property damage, cattle loss, etc.
The most number of applications for HWC in the duration from 2019-20 to 2021-22, were from the Wayanad North division (N = 3365), followed by Kannur division (N = 3164) and Wayanad South division (N = 2927). At the same time, the least number of applications were from the Parambikulam division (N = 2), followed by Periyar East division (N = 25) and Munnar Wildlife division (N = 36).
The large number of conflicts being reported from the Wayanad North and South divisions could be due to the proximity to a large relatively undisturbed tract of forest in Wayanad that is in close proximity to forest land in the neighbouring states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The vast majority of applications reported from Wayanad North and South divisions were for crop damage, followed by cattle loss, property damage and house damage. At the same time, majority of cases reported from Kannur division were due to crop damage, followed by human injury and property damage. The large number of applications being reported from Wayanad North and South divisions as well as the Kannur division indicate a rise in encroachment into forest land or increased invasion of wild animals into agricultural land.
Crop damage was the major source of HWC for the duration from 2019-20 to 2021-22, making up 70.538% (N = 21340) of the total number of applications submitted. This was followed by human injury which consisted 12.835% (N = 3883) of the applications. Property damage was in third place totalling 7.86% (N = 2378) of applications. Cattle loss, house damage and human death made up 5.201% (N = 1575), 2.353% (N = 712) and 1.206% (N = 365) respectively.
Total Forest Area and Boundary
The total forest area of the state is 11520.058 sq.km. (Kerala Forest Statistics 2019) while the mean forest area for the 36 divisions of the state was found to be 319.814 sq.km. (64.176-911.122 sq.km, SD ± 196.255). The mean length of forest boundary was found to be 467.941 sq.km. (57.39–1407 sq.km, SD ± 328.151)
HWC Index (HWC i ) and Correlation
The HWCi values ranged from 0.002 (Parambikulam) to 7.598 (Kannur). Four divisions had an HWCi index > 3; these are Kannur (7.598), Wayanad North (5.717), Kasargod (4.749) and Wayanad South (3.777). These divisions had a significant number of HWC for the size of their forest area. Another 10 divisions had an HWCi index of above 1, but below 3. They had an above average number of HWCs that had occurred within their jurisdiction, relative to the size of their forest area.
Analysis of Pearson’s correlation coefficient between the HWCi and total length of forest boundary found that there is negligible correlation between the length of the forest boundary and the HWC index (r = 0.184). However, there is a moderate positive correlation (r = 0.451) between the total length of forest boundary and the number of applications for compensation.
Table 2
Table 2
Division-wise area of forest, length of forest boundary, number of applications for compensation and HWC index
Sl. No. | Division | Total Forest Area in each Division (in sq.km.) | Total Length of Forest Boundary (in sq. km.) | No. of Applications for Compensation due to HWC | HWCi |
1 | Thiruvananthapuram | 372.494 | 397.29 | 779 | 0.796 |
2 | Themala | 148.944 | 250 | 338 | 0.864 |
3 | Achenkovil | 285.869 | 221.44 | 67 | 0.089 |
4 | Ranni | 911.122 | 760.92 | 1107 | 0.462 |
5 | Punalur | 275.707 | 843.55 | 985 | 1.36 |
6 | Konni | 334.667 | 159.7 | 736 | 0.837 |
7 | Kothamangalam | 317.022 | 484.11 | 204 | 0.245 |
8 | Munnar | 770.353 | 1407 | 494 | 0.244 |
9 | Marayoor | 64.176 | 105 | 411 | 2.438 |
10 | Mankulam | 90.057 | 211.17 | 505 | 2.135 |
11 | Kottayam | 662.988 | 596.14 | 660 | 0.379 |
12 | Vazhachal | 353.414 | 250 | 203 | 0.218 |
13 | Chalakudy | 237.51 | 484.99 | 847 | 1.357 |
14 | Malayatoor | 610.281 | 720.31 | 1460 | 0.91 |
15 | Thrissur | 212.088 | 795 | 688 | 1.235 |
16 | Mannarkkad | 429.679 | 893 | 1631 | 1.445 |
17 | Nilambur North | 439.987 | 721 | 1117 | 0.966 |
18 | Nilambur South | 327.993 | 294.88 | 506 | 0.587 |
19 | Palakkad | 263.747 | 764.99 | 1175 | 1.696 |
20 | Nenmara | 356.946 | 887.85 | 683 | 0.728 |
21 | Kozhikode | 309.057 | 815.39 | 1402 | 1.727 |
22 | Wayanad North | 224.099 | 343.55 | 3365 | 5.717 |
23 | Wayanad South | 295.018 | 1096.3 | 2927 | 3.777 |
24 | Kannur | 158.562 | 503.35 | 3164 | 7.598 |
25 | Kasargod | 122.91 | 630.99 | 1533 | 4.749 |
26 | Thiruvananthapuram WL | 211.98 | 220.1 | 39 | 0.07 |
27 | Shendurney | 172.233 | 103 | 118 | 0.26 |
28 | Periyar East | 709 | 207.5 | 25 | 0.013 |
29 | Periyar West | 216 | 129.67 | 74 | 0.13 |
30 | Munnar WL | 241.077 | 342 | 36 | 0.056 |
31 | Idukki WL | 130.524 | 160.67 | 169 | 0.493 |
32 | Parambikulam | 376.9 | 153.5 | 2 | 0.002 |
33 | Wayanad WL | 344.534 | 474 | 2306 | 2.548 |
34 | Silent Valley | 237.491 | 198.23 | 162 | 0.259 |
35 | Peechi | 213.504 | 161.9 | 104 | 0.185 |
36 | Aralam | 85.38 | 57.39 | 231 | 1.03 |
It was observed that HWC was recorded in all forest and wildlife divisions of the state during the period from 2019 to 2022. The divisions of Wayanad North, Kannur and Wayanad South had the most number of applications against HWC, while the divisions Parambikulam, Periyar East and Munnar WL had the least number of applications (Fig. 3).
A study on human-elephant conflict (HEC) conducted by Sengupta et al.(2020) in the duration between 2009 and 2015 found that HEC was recorded in all districts of Kerala excluding Alappuzha, with the districts Palakkad, Kannur and Wayanad recording large number of HEC within their jurisdictions which corroborates with the present study where the divisions in Wayanad district (namely Wayanad North division and Wayanad South division) and Kannur district (namely Kannur division) recorded the most number of compensation claims due to HWC in the duration in between 2019 to 2022.
In our present study, crop damage was found to be the major form of HWC in Kerala, making up 70.538% of all HWC recorded for the duration between 2019 and 2022. Similarly, crop damage and property loss together constituted 81.777% of HWC between 2015 and 2022. Similar results were obtained by Sengupta et al. (2020) where crop foraging was found to be the most frequent cause of damage. HEC due to crop foraging by elephants accounted for 57–71% of all cases documented in the study conducted by Sengupta et al. (2020).
Sengupta et al. (2020) found that for the districts Wayanad, Palakkad and Kannur, crop damage accounted for 95%, 94% and 82% respectively of the total number of cases registered. Similarly in our study, we found that for the forest divisions Wayanad North, Wayanad South, Wayanad WL, Palakkad and Kannur, crop damage accounted for 88.38% (N = 2974), 84.352% (N = 2469), 85.385% (N = 1969), 66.978% (N = 787) and 67.067% (N = 2122) respectively.
In our study, we found moderately positive correlation (r = 0.451) between the total length of forest boundary and the number of applications for compensation due to HWC, but there was no correlation (r = 0.015) between total forest area of a division and the number of applications due to HWC. A study conducted by Gubbi et al. (2014) found no correlation between HEC with the perimeter of the PA boundary and the forest area of a division.