Inspire Positivity

Last year, I attended a special screening of the film “Avni Ki Kismat,” which brought to light the tragic fate of Avni, the tigress, and her two cubs. Avni, a mere 18 months old, met her demise in 2018 in Maharashtra’s Yavatmal district, where she was deemed a threat to the local population and labelled a maneater by the forest department. Asit Ghosh, a fellow alumnus from my college and a passionate animal enthusiast, depicted how regulations were circumvented to clear forest land, including Avni’s natural habitat, to make way for a cement plant. Despite the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972, which prohibits hunting and safeguards animal habitats, Avni became a victim of human greed and corruption. This injustice mirrors the infamous blackbuck hunting case involving Bollywood actor Salman Khan and others, which concluded in the Rajasthan High Court in July 2019, with the accused acquitted due to insufficient evidence.

In this blog, I aim to delve into the broader issue of fostering peaceful coexistence with nature while minimizing human interference in its natural order. My journey toward this exploration began in childhood, witnessing the routine culling of stray dogs by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi in an attempt to control their population. However, progress emerged in 2001 when the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) issued guidelines prohibiting the culling of stray dogs for population control. These guidelines emphasized the importance of humane methods, such as sterilization and vaccination programs, to manage urban stray dog populations. Despite these measures, controversies persist, with one faction advocating for the feeding of stray dogs in places like children’s parks, while another champions human rights. These conflicts between humans and animals underscore a broader discord within urban environments, extending to clashes between elephants, monkeys, and even vulnerable bird species like sparrows.

As humans stand at the centre of these conflicts, we must reflect on our role as stewards of the earth. What measures are we taking to mitigate these conflicts, and how can we ensure a harmonious coexistence with nature? This blog aims to initiate a dialogue on these pressing questions, hoping to spark meaningful discussions and pave the way for tangible solutions.

Cultural Tradition:

In our cultural heritage, the Rigveda guides us with profound wisdom:

Rigveda 10.16.1:

आ नो भद्रा: क्रतवो यन्तु विश्वत: |

Translation: “Let noble thoughts come to us from every direction”, suggesting a holistic harmony with all living beings, including animals. This verse advocates for fostering positive and benevolent relationships with every aspect of creation, promoting a harmonious coexistence.

Similarly, within the epic Mahabharata, in Anushasana Parva (The Instructions), verse 115.8, embedded in a broader discourse on righteousness and societal obligations, we find a profound insight:

Mahabharata, Anushasana Parva 115.8:

अद्यापि नो महीं चित्त्वा द्रुमान् चित्त्वा च वनानि।

यः पचेत् सर्वभूतानि स न वेद धर्ममाहितः।।

Translation: “He who cuts down trees and forests even today, knows no righteousness.”

This verse underscores that even in ancient times, the destruction of forests and the killing of animals were deemed contrary to righteousness, or dharma. It implies that those who partake in such acts lack comprehension of ethical conduct, emphasizing the imperative of safeguarding nature and its inhabitants.

Therefore, traditionally in India, we have followed a tradition of peaceful coexistence. Perhaps, influenced by such teachings, conservationists like the late Sundar Lal Bahuguna, who initiated the Chipko movement, underscored the deep-rooted connection of our culture with forests. He referred to our culture as ‘अरण्य संस्कृति’, suggesting our deep relationship with forests and the imperative of coexisting with its denizens.

Historical Legacy of British Era

We cannot overlook the historical legacies of the British era, which include the exploitation of forest resources and the displacement of tribal communities. These injustices, coupled with modern anthropogenic pressures, have fueled conflicts arising from human intervention, lax regulation, corruption, and greed. Regrettably, this legacy persists even after independence and is unlikely to change significantly in the foreseeable future.

Consequently, we are compelled to address a crucial question: How can we cultivate a harmonious coexistence with animals?

Top of Form

How to Coexist with Animals?

I lack sufficient knowledge of forest conservation and implication of all actions, so I suggest that for dealing with this complicated affair, there should be a credible partnership between the Government and the Civil Society. The suggestions provided below are based on what appeals to my common sense and the list is not comprehensive. These could be deliberated among the multidisciplinary expert committees and accepted or rejected based on their merit:

Regulation of Dog and Cat Feeders in the City Colonies:

Strategies for Coexisting with Animals:

As someone with limited expertise in forest conservation, I advocate for a robust partnership between the Government and Civil Society to address this complex issue. The suggestions I present below are grounded in practicality and require thoughtful consideration by multidisciplinary expert committees:

1. Regulation of Dog and Cat Feeders in City Colonies: Addressing the pressing issue of uncontrolled stray dog populations in urban areas demands a balanced approach. Traditional practices of residents feeding strays were harmonious, ensuring cleanliness while not disturbing the natural behaviour of dogs to find their own food. However, recent interventions by external groups have disrupted this balance, leading to conflicts. If external feeders wish to contribute, they must also mitigate aggression in strays and maintain cleanliness in feeding areas because their action seems to impact their natural tendencies. The external feeding practices can impact the natural behaviour of stray dogs, including their predation tendencies and aggression. Further, it goes against the natures own management where reduced availability of food and lesser carrying capacity of environment is used as a way of population control. This might be the reason of enhanced aggression and changed behaviour of stray dogs. Possibly this needs more investigations by the experts in the field yet I came across a few examples in other countries where feeding the stray animals including dogs is prohibited to maintain natural balance:

1. France: In many cities and towns in France, feeding stray animals, including dogs, is regulated or prohibited. This measure aims to prevent overpopulation of stray animals, reduce conflicts between humans and strays, and maintain public health and safety.
2. Singapore: Singapore has strict regulations against feeding stray animals, including dogs. Feeding stray dogs is prohibited in public places to prevent the spread of diseases, reduce aggressive behavior in strays, and maintain cleanliness in public areas.
3. Australia: In various states and territories of Australia, feeding stray dogs without authorization is either regulated or prohibited. This measure helps control the stray dog population, minimize risks to public health and safety, and protect native wildlife.
4. United Arab Emirates: In some cities in the United Arab Emirates, feeding stray dogs without permission is prohibited. This regulation aims to prevent overpopulation of strays, reduce conflicts between humans and strays, and maintain public cleanliness and safety.

2. Wildlife Management:
3. Monkeys: The influx of monkeys into urban colonies stems from the scarcity of their natural food sources. Residents face various challenges, including property damage and safety risks. While some monkeys are relocated to wildlife sanctuaries, this approach is often ineffective. Conservationists must develop reserves with adequate food and limited human access to address this issue sustainably. Some cities have designated areas where monkeys are captured, sterilized, and then relocated to forests or wildlife sanctuaries far from human settlements. Additionally, efforts are made to create natural barriers, such as planting certain types of trees or installing fences, to prevent monkeys from entering residential areas. But more efforts are needed in this direction.
4. Elephant and Animal Corridors: Incidents of elephants being harmed by human infrastructure underscore the need for proactive measures. Constructing underground tunnels, as seen in other regions, can facilitate safe animal crossings, mitigating risks to both wildlife and humans. For example this is practiced in the Kaziranga corridor.
5. Big Cats: The encroachment of big cats into residential areas highlights the urgency of preserving their natural habitats. This necessitates a comprehensive approach led by conservationists, forest experts, and big cat specialists to identify suitable territories for relocation.

Challenges:

In context of India, it might be a challenge to implement these suggestions, for example the following:

1. Cultural Factors: There are some cultural factors on people’s attitudes and behaviours towards wildlife conservation. Many of them help conservation of wildlife such as sacred groves (areas protected due to religious beliefs) serve as important refuges for biodiversity. But this is a diverse country and there are also beliefs where some rituals involve hunting or using animal parts, which can impact wildlife populations.
2. Lack of Awareness: There is still a lack of awareness about wild life conservation which sometimes culminates into needless killing of wildlife. Snakes are a regular victim of this lack of awareness. Recently a leopard strayed into a village in north Delhi’s Wazirabad. The presence of the leopard created panic among the residents. During this encounter, the leopard injured eight people before being tranquillized by forest department officials after an over five-hour-long rescue operation. Such incidents highlight the importance of raising awareness about safe coexistence with wildlife and implementing effective management strategies to prevent harm to both humans and animals.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this blog serves as a call to action, urging stakeholders to acknowledge the reality of human-wildlife conflicts and prioritize peaceful coexistence. While not exhaustive, these proposals aim to initiate a dialogue and pave the way for viable solutions to emerge. May our collective efforts lead to a harmonious relationship with nature.

Top of Form