Saving a Species, Not Just Individuals
Photo courtesy of Spencer Manuelpillai
There is, quite rightly, a public outcry when a tusker is killed. There are probably less than two dozen mature tuskers left on the island, if that. This year over 350 wild elephants have been killed to date, with over 100 humans also succumbing to the conflict. Since 2010, almost 5,000 elephants have died and this number is continuing to rise. A recent census (final results still pending) conducted in 2024 estimated that there were between 6,000 and 7,000 wild elephants in Sri Lanka. If so, at the rates of killing very soon there may not be a sustainable population of this endangered species remaining. Tuskers are just a small minority of the total population, about 6%, and without the majority, they would not be able to survive. In other words, for these magnificent individuals to be saved, we must protect the species first. No elephants, no tuskers.
The ill-informed who try and justify the continued killing of elephants cite some of the following for their assertions:
1. Elephant numbers are increasing: There is no data to support this claim as the only two “comprehensive” censuses conducted on the elephant in 2011 and 2024 were methodologically flawed (in 2011 due to the war it was not possible to physically count the populations in the North and East) and in 2024 elephants counts were done in many more waterholes than in 2011. It seems quite obvious that if one counts elephants in more locations, the number of elephants counted would be higher. Therefore, the figures they derive are guesstimates at the best. Unlike in Eastern and Southern Africa, where elephants inhabit large open savannahs, Sri Lanka does not have these. Instead, elephants graze in open glades among patches of forest. As such methods of aerial counts using small aircraft or drones are largely ineffective as they cannot see below the foliage.
In addition, each elephant has unique features which need to be identified and recognised by any censor to avoid double counting. This needs the keen eye of the researcher, wildlife ranger or tracker, a talent that is honed over many months and years of observation. For both censuses, the majority of the censors were volunteers for whom such a skill would be difficult and almost impossible at night, even full moon nights, on which some of the counts were alleged to have been conducted in 2024. Over the three days of the count, what guarantees are there that an individual was not counted twice or even thrice and some not even counted at all?
2. Elephants should be driven into National Parks and confined there: Frankly, it would be kinder to shoot them. Elephants feed primarily on grass. Forests offer them little food. Sri Lanka’s wonder is that it has numerous national parks and sanctuaries, all with varying habitats. Of these, there are relatively few that have the ideal habitat for elephants – open grasslands interspersed with forest patches and plenty of water sources. This is why the Habarana parks of Minneriya, Kaudulla and Hurulu Eco Park and Uda Walawe and Lunugamvehera in the South used to attract large numbers during the drought months. However, this movement to these parks is only seasonal when the receding waters of the reservoirs expose fresh grasses. When the rains come again, they dissipate as each park has a carrying capacity for elephants. Each adult animal needs over a hundredweight of fodder a day. If confined to a park, they will soon eat themselves out of existence. This is why elephants range from place to place to allow the foliage to regenerate before returning to where they were. The fact is that most elephants range outside of the national parks (around 70%), moving between fragmented forests and feeding on the grasslands in between. If these movement paths are disrupted, that is when human-elephant conflict occurs.
A further reason for conflict is when the habitats in national parks are altered, mainly due to bad management practices over the years. As an example, the habitat of Uda Walawe has changed dramatically from open grasslands to scrubland dominated by invasive alien species through biological succession. As a result, elephants have a vastly reduced availability of food sources. Most of the once resident population of elephants has had to move out, resulting in an increase in conflict in the surrounding areas. In addition, the remaining elephants are in poor body condition and there is an increase in the mortality of calves as their mothers have insufficient nutrition to produce milk in the volumes that they require. This is happening in Block I of the Yala National Park too, where due to politically motivated, ill-advised fencing between wildlife and forestry lands, the resident herds cannot range as they once used to. Researchers have found that over 50% of the calves in Yala die before they reach two years old. The same seems to be happening in Uda Walawe too and elsewhere where food is scarce.
Yet, despite of this, according to the 2026 latest budget, officers will receive special training and be permanently attached to monitor elephant enclosures. Surely this is not to replicate the Horror of Horowpathana, an enclosure designed to imprison problem elephants? Most of these elephants either escaped or died of starvation. In addition, a further Rs. 80 million is allocated for pasture and water source management to ensure adequate food and water for elephants. Considering the amount of fodder an elephant consumes a day, how long will this last? To whom is it meant? Is this a plan to change national parks into zoos?
3. Elephants (and wildlife) are of no value to the country: Visit any of the government tourism websites or of those belonging to hotels bordering national parks and the fallacy of this statement is immediately exposed. They all lead with wildlife, in pictures and narrative, from the seasonal gathering of elephants at Minneriya, to Yala being a special place to see leopards during the day to the rest of the natural wonders that this country is blessed with. Where else in the world could one watch the largest terrestrial animal, the elephant, or the largest marine mammal, the blue whale, just a couple of hours later? Uda Walawe is renowned for being one place where an Asian elephant can be seen 24 hours a day on 365 days a year. Sadly, this is now under threat due to the mismanagement of the habitat in the park.
Prior to the Covid pandemic, conservationist Srilal Miththapala undertook an exercise to estimate the income generated by the Department of Wildlife, Forestry Department, hotels, safari jeep drivers and the local community during the few months of the gathering at Minneriya. He guesstimated a figure of Rs 3 billion. With Yala’s income being approximately Rs. 6-7 Million a day, a similar exercise generated a much higher figure. The majority of visitors to these parks are tourists who bring foreign currency into the country. Which other natural attraction in Sri Lanka generates that amount of income? Do they come to see glorified zoos or wildlife living and healthily surviving in their natural habitat?
4. The National Action Plan for the mitigation of human-elephant conflict does not work: Of course it does not because it has never been implemented in full. Instead the government is now redrafting another action plan to fit its needs. The existing plan was prepared by a special, presidentially appointed committee drawn from all of the relevant stakeholders in the conflict; statutory organisations, researchers, scientists, conservation organisations, local government officials from the affected areas, representatives from the tourist trade, those representing the affected communities and others. They produced a comprehensive plan with short, medium and long term objectives that, if implemented, would have greatly reduced conflict. Instead, the wheel is being reinvented and, as always, for political benefit.
In 2024 there was a significant decrease in the fatalities from the conflict when compared with 2023. While the trend has been for elephant deaths to increase on an annual basis, there were around 100 less elephant deaths recorded in 2024 compared to 2023. One possible reason for this was the partial implementation of some aspects of the plan, most notably the erection of approximately 300 Community and Seasonal Agricultural Fences in some conflict areas. The electric fence is still the most effective way of deterring a wild elephant from entering an area. Sri Lanka has erected sufficient electric fences to circumvent the island almost three times over. Yet the human-elephant conflict has exploded in the last decade. Why? Most of the electric fences have been erected in the wrong places – mainly by political behest – between Forest Department and Department of Wildlife land, this although they have the same habitat and, in many cases elephants on both sides of the fence. Since the main objective is to protect the lives of humans and of their cultivations, the fences should be erected on habitat boundaries between elephant ranges and human habitation. In addition, others have been erected, again on political directive, in ad hoc locations, mainly to protect some area of personal interest and which the elephants merely walk around. And what has this government proposing? The erection of 1,500 km of further fencing and the employment of a large number of Civil Defence Forces specially appointed to report damage to these fences and to try and keep elephants from damaging them (Rs. 1,000 million allocated for completing electric fence construction and related activities. A further Rs. 300 million allocated to repair, complete or construct electric fences in essential areas). According to the budget, Rs. 375 million is being allocated for food and fuel allowances to support 5,000 Civil Security Service officers assigned to wildlife monitoring. Why all this financial cost when cheaper solutions are available, have been tried and tested and proven to be effective? What folly is this?
Politics is the greatest threat to wildlife and future generations of humans. The elephant is acknowledged as a keystone species, i.e., a species that has a disproportionately large impact on its ecosystem. These species are essential for maintaining the health and wellbeing of their environment. If it disappears from them, the ecosystem may change dramatically or even collapse, leading to loss of biodiversity. In addition, the Asian Elephant is listed by IUCN as being endangered. So what recklessness is this that the government seems intent on managing the destruction of this vital species?
Elephants have had a prominent role in the history, culture and religion of this nation. This seems no longer so. A government that promised change and the appointment of qualified individuals to positions of authority on behalf of the people of Sri Lanka seems to have made an exception as regards wildlife conservation. True, the individuals concerned are qualified but not in the disciplines required to have informed knowledge of the subjects they govern. Instead they resort to strategies that have been tried by previous regimes that have failed abysmally and resulted in the further escalation of the conflict. As Albert Einstein said, “Insanity is doing the same wrong thing over and over again and expecting different results”. The government seems to be doing just that.
It is not just the elephant but human lives and livelihoods that are being endangered. Village and cultivation fencing are designed to protect them, leaving the elephant to wander on its traditional home ranges outside that is provided they have not been blocked by illegal, unplanned development.
Why is it that the communities who have wild elephants as their neighbours only suffer but never directly benefit from this gift of nature while the corporate world does? What about village-based wildlife tourism? What about sharing the vast incomes made by the national parks with the local communities that border them, constructing schools, medical centres and other necessary infrastructure. It is globally accepted that the sustainability of wildlife protected areas depends on local communities benefiting economically from the protected areas. Changing their perception from that of seeing wildlife as the enemy to be destroyed to that of benefactors who need to be protected is the only long term hope for the wildlife and wilderness of Sri Lanka. For should these creatures and places disappear, there will be a corresponding damaging effect on all the people of this nation, especially with global warming, decreasing levels of oxygen, decreasing water sources and air pollution. Healthy forests and other wilderness areas bring rain, oxygen and clean air. These wild places will not stay healthy without wildlife, especially keystone species like the elephant. To save people, we need to save the wonderful natural heritage that this country is blessed with, not just for the populations of today but for future generations too. And there lies the main problem: government for today and damn the future.
