- A critical tool in mitigating Human-Elephant Conflict?
Last week, 12 August, marked World Elephant Day. The Sri Lankan elephant (Elephas maximus maximus) is a unique and culturally significant subspecies of the Asian elephant. It is the largest of the Asian elephant subspecies, with males reaching heights of up to 11 feet (3.4 metres) and weighing as much as 12,000 pounds (5,400 kg).
In addition to the ecological significance of the Sri Lankan elephant, there is also its often hotly debated role in Sri Lankan culture, both as a beast of burden in times gone by and for its ceremonial role in many of our religious processions.
They have been integral to local traditions for over two millennia, featuring prominently in religious ceremonies and festivals, such as the annual Kandy Esala Perahera, where they lead processions bearing sacred relics. The elephant is also depicted in many national emblems, cementing its role as a vital part of the Sri Lankan identity.
We must also recognise its economic value as a tourism asset. The charisma of the elephant makes it one of our biggest wildlife tourism draws and plays a crucial role in the tourism sector, significantly contributing to the country’s economy. Elephant-related tourism generates over Rs. 1 billion (approximately $ 5.8 million) annually, surpassing the revenue from tea exports, known as the staple of Sri Lanka’s economy.
The presence of approximately 6,000 wild elephants (the last count done by the Department of Wildlife Conservation [DWC] in 2011 put the number of elephants in Sri Lanka at 5,800) enhances the appeal of national parks and wildlife reserves, attracting both local and international tourists seeking unique experiences such as safaris and elephant rides. This influx of visitors not only supports conservation efforts but also creates jobs and stimulates local businesses.
But despite the value of the Sri Lankan elephant in both tangible and intangible ways, it remains under threat. It is recognised as endangered by both the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the World Wildlife Fund.
The primary threat to Sri Lankan elephants is the loss of forests. The large blocks of forests they require are increasingly fragmented by clearing for human settlements and expanding agriculture in Sri Lanka. With this comes ever-increasing conflict with humans, which has led to the destruction of property and death of both humans and elephants. The problem is compounded by the elephants’ preference for crops such as sugar cane, bananas, and other fruits frequently grown in the region.
Escalating Human-Elephant Conflict (HEC) has seen the death toll of wild elephants increase exponentially. From 2017 to 2023 alone, elephant deaths increased from 256 to 470. For 2023, it was reported that of these deaths, nearly 50% (200) were the result of human-related activity, with 83 elephants being shot dead, 47 killed by explosive devices like ‘hakka patas,’ 66 killed by electric traps, and four dying from poisoning. A total of 23 elephants had been run over by trains.
Responding to HEC
The numbers alone illustrate that HEC is a significant issue in Sri Lanka, where the expansion of agricultural lands and human settlements increasingly overlaps with elephant habitats. This overlap has resulted in frequent encounters between humans and elephants, leading to devastating consequences for both.
In 2020, renowned elephant conservation scientist and Centre for Conservation and Research Chairman Dr. Prithiviraj Fernando chaired the development of a National Action Plan for HEC mitigation, consulting with various scientists and other stakeholders to develop strategies aimed at addressing the escalating conflicts between humans and elephants, particularly focusing on the construction and maintenance of electric fences.
The plan emphasised the need for community-based electric fences, such as village and paddy field fences, to prevent elephants from entering settlements and damaging crops. In instances where community involvement was not feasible, the Government would take responsibility for constructing and maintaining these fences. Additionally, the plan recommended relocating electric fences to the boundaries of elephant habitats to further minimise conflicts.
Beyond electric fencing, the action plan advocated for a comprehensive approach that included minimising activities that might escalate conflicts, such as elephant drives, and enhancing compensation mechanisms for human and property losses caused by elephants. It also suggested implementing road safety measures, conducting public awareness programmes, and developing insurance initiatives to support affected communities.
The plan emphasised the importance of long-term strategies, including habitat management trials and better elephant distribution surveys, to ensure sustainable coexistence and reduce HEC over time. Overall, the focus on effective fencing solutions, combined with broader community engagement and management strategies, aimed to foster a harmonious relationship between humans and elephants in Sri Lanka.
There is never a one-size-fits-all approach to conservation, but with various mitigation strategies being tried, electric elephant fences have proved one of the most prominent and effective tools for mitigating HEC. However, the effectiveness and suitability of these fences as a long-term solution are subjects of ongoing debate among conservationists, scientists, and wildlife managers.
Efficacy of fences
The Sunday Morning reached out to elephant enthusiast and conservation advocate Srilal Miththapala for his views on the efficacy of fences.
Elephant fences, particularly electric ones, are designed to prevent elephants from entering human settlements and farmlands, thereby reducing the chances of conflict. These fences typically run along the perimeters of villages or around agricultural fields, creating a barrier that deters elephants from crossing into areas where they may come into contact with humans.
“Elephant fences are effective to a certain degree in keeping elephants out of human settlements. However, the key issue lies in their maintenance and proper management,” Miththapala said, highlighting that while fences could be an effective short-term solution, they often failed when not adequately maintained, leading to breaches that allowed elephants to enter human areas.
Maintaining these electric fences, the majority of which border our bigger National Parks, is a significant challenge and falls to the DWC. The DWC often struggles with resources and manpower to run smoothly, but DWC Director of Protected Area Management Manjula Amararathna shared with The Sunday Morning that the DWC had been working to rectify the issue of gaps in electric fence management.
“Most of our electric fences are working well, especially after we addressed the earlier problem of insufficient staff to maintain them,” Amararathna shared. “This year, we recruited over 4,000 multi-task development workers who have been assigned to fence maintenance. As a result, there has been a noticeable decrease in both human and elephant deaths compared to last year.”
This improvement in fence maintenance has led to a significant reduction in the frequency and severity of HEC incidents. However, Amararathna acknowledged that fences were not a perfect solution. “Elephants, particularly males, may still break fences if there are nutritious crops like maize or rice nearby,” he explained.
This natural wide-ranging foraging behaviour highlights one of the ongoing challenges of measures such as electric fences.
Where a fence is placed matters
Traditionally, elephant fences in Sri Lanka were erected along legal boundaries, often demarcating the edges of protected areas or Government land. Conservationists have pointed out that this approach does not always consider the ecological needs of elephants, leading to situations where fences cut through the middle of their natural habitats and limit their access to food or water or restrict their movement across corridors.
This approach to placing fences also contributes to the likelihood of them being breached, as elephants have a biological and ecological need to keep attempting to breach these fences. Recognising this issue, Amararathna shared that the DWC had begun shifting its focus toward erecting fences along ecological boundaries instead.
“Earlier, fences were erected around legal boundaries, sometimes even cutting through the middle of the jungle,” he noted. “But now, we are erecting fences along the boundaries of villages and forests. This way, elephants have enough space to meet their food and water requirements, reducing the need for them to break through fences.”
This shift toward ecological boundaries marks an important step in making fences more effective and sustainable and responding to data provided by scientists. Further, by giving elephants access to sufficient resources within their natural habitats, these fences help reduce the pressure on elephants to seek food and water in human-dominated areas.
University of Colombo Department of Zoology and Environment Sciences Senior Prof. Dewaka Weerakoon, an expert in wildlife conservation, also spoke about the importance of placing fences in response to ecological needs rather than logistical ones. “Fences should ideally be placed along boundaries that make ecological sense, not just legal ones.
“When fences are placed with an understanding of elephant behaviour and habitat needs, they are more likely to be effective in the long term,” he said.
Prof. Weerakoon’s perspective underscores the importance of integrating ecological principles into the design and placement of elephant fences.
Temporary electric fences
An evolution of the permanent electric fence and one that also responds to ecological needs is the temporary electric fences that have been used to protect agricultural fields, particularly during the farming season before crops are harvested. These fences are erected around farmland to prevent elephants from raiding crops and are typically removed after the harvest season.
Amararathna pointed out that these temporary fences, which were a fairly new innovation, had shown themselves to be highly effective in reducing crop damage and preventing HEC.
“Temporary electric fences around paddy fields, especially after harvesting, have proven to be very effective,” he said. “These fences help protect crops during the growing season, and after harvesting, the areas within the fences can be used by elephants. This strategy not only protects farmers’ livelihoods but also provides elephants with access to food in a controlled manner.”
However, while temporary fences may offer a practical solution during specific periods, their effectiveness on a larger scale is limited. For instance, Miththapala argued: “Temporary fences can work well in localised areas, but they are not a comprehensive solution to HEC. They need to be part of a broader strategy that includes other measures such as habitat restoration, community engagement, and the development of alternative livelihoods for people living in elephant-prone areas.”
The flip side
Despite the successes reported by the DWC in maintaining fences and reducing HEC, elephant fences, both permanent and temporary, are not without their challenges and limitations. One of the main issues is the high cost of installation and maintenance. Electric fences require regular monitoring and repairs, and the costs associated with these activities can be prohibitive, particularly in remote or economically disadvantaged areas.
Moreover, fences can sometimes exacerbate the problem by creating a false sense of security among local communities and when fences are not properly maintained, or when elephants find ways to breach them, the resulting encounters can be even more dangerous. “Fences should not be seen as a foolproof solution,” Prof. Weerakoon warned. “They are just one tool in a broader toolkit for managing HEC and they need to be complemented by other strategies such as community education and awareness programmes.”
Another challenge is that fences can disrupt elephant movement patterns and fragment their habitats. This can lead to increased stress among elephant populations and may even contribute to conflicts in areas that were previously peaceful. Miththapala emphasised: “While fences can keep elephants out of certain areas, they can also restrict their natural movements, leading to unintended consequences. We need to be careful not to create new problems while trying to solve existing ones.”
The issue of habitat fragmentation is particularly concerning in the context of Sri Lanka’s growing human population and expanding agricultural lands. As more land is converted for human use, elephants are increasingly squeezed into smaller and smaller areas, making it more difficult for them to find the resources they need. In some cases, this can lead to increased aggression among elephants as they compete for limited food and water.
All conservation must be holistic
Given the limitations and challenges associated with elephant fences, it is clear that they cannot be relied upon as the sole solution to HEC. Instead, a more holistic approach is needed, one that addresses the root causes of conflict and promotes coexistence between humans and elephants.
One promising strategy is the restoration of elephant habitats. By restoring degraded areas and expanding protected areas, conservationists can help ensure that elephants have access to the resources they need within their natural habitats, reducing the likelihood of them venturing into human-dominated areas. This approach not only benefits elephants but also helps protect the livelihoods of local communities by reducing crop damage and property destruction.
Another key component of a holistic approach is community engagement. By involving local communities in conservation efforts and providing them with the tools and knowledge they need to coexist with elephants, conservationists can help reduce the incidence of conflict and foster a sense of stewardship among local people. This can include initiatives such as community-based monitoring programmes, the promotion of alternative livelihoods, and the development of early warning systems to alert people to the presence of elephants in their area.
Education and awareness programmes are also crucial in promoting coexistence. By educating people about elephant behaviour and the importance of conservation, conservationists can help dispel myths and misconceptions about elephants and promote more positive attitudes toward these animals. This can be particularly important in areas where HEC is most severe, as it can help reduce fear and hostility towards elephants.
“There is no one single solution or silver bullet – if there was, we would have found it and applied it by now. Each location comes with a different prescription and plan for meaningful conservation,” Prof. Weerakoon explained.
He noted that while translocation (despite being a harmful practice) may be necessary in one area, in another area it would be the absolute worst conservation measure to take, with the most important measure for that area being managing and strengthening the habitat to increase its carrying capacity for all species.
“Following one conservation measure exclusively is like seeking treatment for a disease that needs three different drugs to be treated effectively and then proceeding to take only one drug and expecting to be cured,” Prof. Weerakoon said.
He also stressed that for meaningful long-term conservation to take place, there needed to be open and transparent collaboration from all stakeholders, from politicians to State institutions to scientists to the general public. “There is no single solution, even the strongest strategy applied all over the country won’t work.”
In addition to these measures, conservationists are also exploring the use of new technologies to mitigate HEC. For example, researchers are experimenting with the use of drones and other remote sensing technologies to monitor elephant movements and identify potential conflict hotspots. These technologies can provide valuable data that can be used to inform the design and placement of fences, as well as other HEC mitigation strategies.
Miththapala too echoed Prof. Weerakoon’s sentiments, noting that while elephant fences could be an effective tool in mitigating HEC, they were not a panacea. Their effectiveness depends on proper maintenance, strategic placement along ecological boundaries, and integration with other HEC mitigation strategies.
While fences can provide a short-term solution to HEC, they must be part of a broader, more holistic approach that addresses the root causes of conflict and promotes coexistence between humans and elephants.
As Miththapala aptly put it: “Fences are just one piece of the puzzle. We need to think beyond fences and focus on creating a world where humans and elephants can coexist peacefully.”
Amararathna echoed this sentiment, emphasising the importance of a balanced approach: “We cannot rely on fences alone. We must continue to explore and implement other strategies to ensure the long-term survival of elephants and the safety of our communities.”
Ultimately, the future of human-elephant coexistence in Sri Lanka will depend on our ability to balance the needs of both species, finding solutions that protect both elephants and human livelihoods. While elephant fences have a role to play, they must be used wisely and in conjunction with other strategies to achieve lasting peace between humans and elephants.