Human–Wild Animal Conflict

Abstract

Wildlife species have faced the impacts of human dominion over the world throughout history. More recently, there has been increased global protection for endangered species as a result of greater awareness and concern for biodiversity. Conservationists are becoming increasingly concerned about the pervasive issue of conflicts between human and wildlife interests, especially as it relates to large carnivores that have the potential to harm both cattle and people. Pre-conflict mitigation refers to proactive measures like fences while post-conflict mitigation refers to compensation payments for lost animals. Both can be used to lessen conflicts between wild animals and livestock owners. The goal of compensation programs is to raise people’s understanding of wildlife. But compensation programs are frequently criticized for being insufficient, difficult, and expensive. Compensation programs must be part of a comprehensive approach that includes options for controlling offending animals, proactive mitigation measures, and, in some cases, broader financial incentives for changes in land use practices in order to be more effective. The latter method has been used in India and several African countries. This chapter deals with various human-animal conflicts and their mitigation strategies. Despite these problems, conservation is likely to become increasingly utilized as biodiversity becomes increasingly threatened and methods of ameliorating threats lag behind.

1. Introduction

Human–wildlife conflict (HWC) refers to the negative interactions between humans and wild animals, with undesirable consequences both for people and their resources, on the one hand, and wildlife and their habitats on the other [1]. As scientists learn more about biodiversity, more species are listed as endangered, more processes are identified as threats to biodiversity, and there is less agreement on the significance of each threatening process. As these pressures intensify, the need to separate biodiversity from threatening processes. Human behavior, whether intentional or unintentional, legal or illegal, is the primary factor influencing the distribution and numbers of large carnivores in many parts of the world today. Conflicts between humans and wildlife are a growing source of concern for conservationists, particularly with regard to large carnivores, which can kill both livestock and humans.

Non-permeability of unelectrified fences is often difficult to achieve for many species, including elephants, lions, and leopards (Panthera pardus), and the effectiveness of electrified fences is highly dependent on maintenance. Human-animal conflict (HAC) and its negative consequences are expected to worsen as the world population grows. They disproportionately affect the rural poor in low-income countries, particularly smallholders in African and South Asian regions with high biodiversity [2]. Farmers have devised a variety of crop-raiding animal mitigation strategies [3]. Smallholders in low-income countries, on the other hand, are largely limited to traditional and low-cost technical measures (e.g., hunting, scaring, building stone or wooden fences) and labor-intensive crop guarding [3], which is a common HAC mitigation strategy.

Human-carnivore conflict is now a common global phenomenon in rural areas, as well as on the outskirts of cities in both developing and developed countries. Human–wildlife interaction and conflict are increasing as the human population and pressure on forest areas grow. It occurs when growing human populations overlap with established wildlife territories, increasing interaction of man and wild animals and thus resulting in increased levels of conflict. Direct wildlife contact occurs in both urban and rural areas, but it is more common inside and around protected areas [4]. Large mammals’ movement and ranging patterns are primarily determined by the availability of food, water, escape cover, and mates.

Effective human-elephant Conflict (HEC) mitigation is difficult to understand and difficult to implement; it remains a complex package of seemingly disparate measures that must be used in combination and flexibly at various scales. The mitigation of HEC began in the mid-1990s. The IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group and its human-elephant Conflict Working Group spearheaded the necessary research and subsequent dissemination of tools to address the issue.

2. What are the reasons/causes for increased HAC?

2.1 Habitat Loss

Only 5% of India’s geographical area is in the protected area category. This space is not enough to have a full-fledged habitat for wild animals. A territorial animal like a male tiger needs an area of 60−100 sq. km. But the area allocated to an entire tiger reserve, like the Bor Tiger Reserve in Maharashtra, is around 140 sq. km. The territorial animals do not have enough space within reserves and their prey does not have enough fodder to thrive on. This has forced the wild animals to move out and venture close to human habitation in search of food, resulting in HAC.

2.2 Increasing infrastructure development

Recent relaxations in norms to allow for a widening of highway and railway networks near these protected areas are the new threats, adding to the old ones of retaliatory poisoning and poaching. Apart from highways, railway and irrigation projects are coming up in tiger reserves. For example, the Ken-Betwa river interlinking project will submerge 100 sq. km of Panna Tiger Reserve [5]. Also, wildlife experts estimate that 29% of the tigers in India are outside the protected areas.

3. Mitigation strategies

1. Mitigation strategies for human–wildlife conflict differ greatly depending on the location and type of conflict. Although passive, nonintrusive prevention measures are always preferred, active intervention is frequently required in conjunction. Whatever approach is taken, the most successful solutions involve local communities in the planning, implementation, and maintenance. Resolving conflicts often necessitates a regional strategy with a response tailored to the specific crisis. Nonetheless, a variety of management techniques are frequently used to resolve conflicts.

2. Translocation of problematic animals: Translocation of problematic animals: Migrating such “challenge” animals from a conflict site to a new location has been used in the past as a mitigation technique, but recent research has shown that this approach can have negative effects on species and is largely ineffective. Translocation can reduce a species’ survival rates and lead to extreme dispersal movements, and “problem” animals frequently resume conflict behaviors in their new location.

3. Erection of fences or other barriers: Building barriers around cattle sheds, establishing distinct wildlife corridors, and erecting box-shaped fences around farms to deter elephants have all proven to be effective and cost-effective strategies for reducing human–wildlife conflict.

4. Improving community education and perception of animals: Different cultures have different perspectives and values on the natural world, and how wildlife is perceived can play a role in exacerbating or alleviating human–wildlife conflict. Conservationists worked with community leaders in one Masaai community to shift perceptions and allow young men to achieve the same social status by protecting lions instead of killing them.

5. Effective land use planning: Changes in land use can help to reduce conflict between humans and crop-raiding animals. For example, after discovering that elephants dislike and avoid plants containing capsaicin, communities in Mozambique began to grow more chili pepper plants. This ingenious and effective method both deters elephants from trampling community farmers’ fields and protects the species.

6. Compensation: In some instances, government entities have been set up to provide budgetary compensation for the damages caused by human–wildlife conflict. These systems hope to reduce the need for retaliatory animal killings by financially enticing the coexistence of humans and wildlife. To name a few, compensation strategies have been used in India, Italy, and South Africa. Compensation’s success in managing human–wildlife conflict has varied greatly due to under-compensation, a lack of local participation, or the government’s failure to provide timely payments.

7. Spatial analyses and mapping conflict hotspots: Human-carnivore conflict and human-elephant conflict, among others, have been successfully mitigated by mapping interactions and developing spatial models. In Kenya, for example, conservationists were able to establish an effective predictor of human-elephant conflict by combining grid-based geographic information systems with simple statistical analyses.

8. Predator-deterring guard dogs: The use of guard dogs to protect livestock from predation has proven to be effective in reducing human-carnivore conflict all over the world. According to a recent review, 15.4 percent of study cases investigating human-carnivore conflict used livestock-guarding dogs as a management technique, with average animal losses 60 times lower than the norm.

9. Managing garbage and artificial feeding to prevent attraction of wildlife: Many wildlife species are attracted to garbage, particularly food waste, resulting in negative interactions with humans. Poor garbage disposal, such as hotel waste, is quickly emerging as an important factor contributing to human-carnivore conflicts in countries such as India. Urgent research to increase understanding of the impact of easily accessible garbage is required, as is better garbage management in areas where carnivores live. Managing garbage disposal and artificial primate feeding can also reduce conflicts and disease transmission opportunities. According to one study, preventing tourists from feeding Japanese macaques reduced aggressive interactions between macaques and humans.

10. Use of technology: Innovation in technology (particularly in information technology) has the potential to play a critical role in the prevention of human–wildlife conflict. Drones and smartphone applications can be used to recognize animal movements and alert highway and railway authorities to prevent animal collisions with vehicles and trains. SMS and WhatsApp messaging systems have also been used to notify people of the presence of animals in the surrounding area. Early warning wireless systems have been used successfully in undulating and flat terrain in Tamil Nadu, India, to reduce human-elephant conflict.

4. Main types of human–wildlife conflicts

With species that are abundant and viewed as pests, extensively managed, or even domesticated, and live in a variety of environments, human–wildlife conflict and coexistence do occur. It should come as no surprise that much research on human–wildlife conflict has concentrated on endangered species. The protection of endangered species and the requirements of local communities must be balanced, which is why many conservation methods include conflict resolution as a key component. The following examples high lightened the effects of typical types of human–wildlife interactions.

4.1 Leopard–human conflicts

In order to retain local support for leopard protection, human killing must be dealt carefully as it is the ultimate and most significant expression of human–leopard conflict. The remote mountain and foothill regions of central and south Asia are the only places where leopards can be found. They can be found in tropical forests, meadows, mountain temperate forests, and locations that are adjacent to cities, where they have access to prey species and some cover to hide in. Athreya and Belsare [6] suggested that they are still thriving in locations where other big cats have been eradicated due to their less specialized diet than other felids. It has previously been considered a common species because of its extensive geographic range and low priority status for conservation.

4.1.1 Biology of the species related to conflict

• Leopards are solitary

• Leopards are territorial

• Leopards are very adaptable and can live near human inhabitations

• Leopards are known to feed on domestic dogs and livestock

Scientists do not advise translocation to resolve leopard conflict because Leopards might spread conflict or start it close to the new release site; following translocation, particularly the elderly leopards, make an effort to return to their homes. Increased leopard populations in the nearby human-dominated areas could result from sustained translocation into a particular forest.

Eight subspecies of the leopard are presently classified by the IUCN Red List as threatened, meaning they are either “endangered” or “critically endangered.” The leopard has been eliminated from a sizable portion of its historical range due to habitat degradation, a decline in natural prey, and direct human harassment.

Livestock raising is a crucial component of the local economy in the majority of developing nations. Particularly the underprivileged locals graze their cattle in or next to forests and protected areas. Commonly used strikes grazing livestock in wooded areas as well when hazards to people are present within human settlements also exist [7].

Tiger

Leopard

4.1.2 Mitigation for human leopard conflict

1. People who live close to forested areas should refrain from keeping pets since they attract leopards.

2. People who live close to forested regions should avoid wandering at dawn and twilight when leopard attacks are frequently anticipated.

3. To protect natural ecosystems from exploitation and to prevent human intervention in such regions, appropriate legislative measures should be applied.

4. When challenged by locals outside of their natural environments, wild carnivores typically unleash panic as retaliatory and protective action. Therefore, it is best to refrain from bothering animals away from their natural environments.

5. Despite years of coexisting with nature, people’s understanding of the ecology and behavior of wild animals is astonishingly limited. Governmental and nongovernmental organizations must therefore step forward to plan awareness campaigns. Activities including instruction and training will aid in fostering tolerance for wild animals. Training and teaching programs for wildlife employees that provide the necessary knowledge for interacting with wild carnivores would encourage conservation commitment and improve the welfare of animals.

6. The state government has increased victim compensation due to the rising number of man-animal conflict cases. The management of wild predators outside of their natural habitats also requires the organization of training programs for wildlife officials.

7. The amount of forest cover has either reduced or declined in quality as a result of habitat degradation brought on by the increasing human population, shifting land use practices, and resulting anthropogenic stressors. Long-term conflict rates can be significantly decreased by avoiding deforestation and increasing the number of trees planted in forest areas.

4.1.3 A guide to identifying leopard attacks

• Wolf, leopard, and hyena are examples of wild carnivores that dwell in and around highly populated human settlements.

• The species responsible for an attack on a person or a piece of livestock must be appropriately identified. For instance, trap cages should not be set up if a wolf is to blame.

• Wolves avoid traps and cages. However, setting up a trap cage will probably trap a leopard, resulting in an unwanted capture.

• The following information will help you identify the family (dog or cat) who attacked you.

• Pugmarks, information on the method of attack or killing, and information from trustworthy eyewitnesses can all be used to learn more about the species.

• It must be remembered that the following are merely recommendations and that it is frequently challenging to gather precise information from the signals in the field.

4.2 Human-tiger conflicts

Despite the necessity to promote coexistence and the prevalence of conflicts between humans and large animals, few studies have actually made an effort to put conflict reduction techniques into practice and assess their efficacy. Locals commonly feel as though their knowledge and opinions regarding conflicts between people and wildlife are being disregarded, which undermines support for initiatives like the Livestock Insurance Fund.

Human-tiger conflicts can be grouped into 3 categories:

1. Tiger attacks humans

2. Tiger attacks domestic animals

3. Tigers that approach human-dominated areas

Tigers may target people as prey, but most of the time they do it out of self-defense to protect their cubs or themselves, particularly if they have already been hurt by people. Tigers generally prey on domestic animals, especially in areas where there are few wild predators to catch them. Although the existence of tigers in regions where humans predominate is not always a recipe for conflict, it may be. Because of this, the local populace closely monitors such events and frequently requests government intervention.

If nothing is done to stop these incidents, as tiger numbers increase, the number of fatalities may also increase. Even though these rates of mortality are minimal in comparison to other factors that affect human populations, the economic and emotional toll on local people is significant and can have a negative impact on efforts to conserve tigers. In regions where wild prey is scarce due to hunting, habitat degradation, and competition with livestock, tigers routinely kill livestock and dogs.

4.2.1 Principles to improve human-Tiger conflicts

The human-tiger Conflict has been addressed using a variety of strategies. They can be broadly divided into four groups:

1. Preventative measures, or those intended to stop or lessen conflict before it occurs;

2. Mitigative measures, or those intended to lessen the effects of conflict after it has already occurred.

3. Reactive actions or those conducted to stop a specific, continuing occurrence;

4. Integrated programs, those that are a part of most or all other actions; and Reactive measures;

4.2.1.1 Preventative measures

1. Improved livestock management

   1. Except for situations where tigers stray into landscapes occupied by humans, depredation of livestock will cease if livestock grazing is prohibited within tiger habitat.

   2. Fencing around cattle enclosures used at night to keep them safe from attacks by tigers and other animals has proven to be effective.

   3. Due to tigers’ aversion to open spaces, the vegetation cover around the enclosures might be lowered.

   4. Because buffalo defend themselves against predators, keeping them alongside cattle may lessen predation, but it will not completely solve the issue because tigers have been known to kill buffalo.

   5. Reducing the number of cattle might assist to prevent disputes, but without strong incentives, people are unlikely to willingly reduce their livestock herds.

2. Management of wild prey

   1. Tiger attacks on livestock and people may increase if there is a lack of natural prey.

   2. Site-specific measures to boost prey populations may include increased law enforcement and legislative reform to decrease overharvest, lessening competition with cattle, and protecting and restoring habitat [8]

   3. Tiger availability must be reduced while efforts are made to boost wild prey; otherwise, livestock predation may grow as tiger density and reproduction rise.

3. Zoning

   1. Human relocation initiatives must be open, fair, and incentive-driven with the aim of separating people and their livestock from vital tiger habitats and transit routes whenever possible.

   2. Removing humans and animals from tiger habitats can stop human-tiger conflict, lessen habitat fragmentation, and aid in the recovery of the prey population.

   3. But this must be weighed against the requirement for migration routes between vital tiger habitats. That is, agricultural lands with sharp edges, like oil palm plantations, act as a barrier to the passage of tigers.

   4. If these areas entirely encircle crucial ecosystems, the tiger populations there will be genetically isolated.

4. Reducing injuries to tigers

   1. Tigers and other large cats are sometimes injured when they attack people or cattle, and the wounds are frequently caused by snares, traps, or gunshots.

   2. Snares set for other animals, such as wild pigs, are frequently used to catch tigers.

   3. Poaching prevention, snare removal, and other initiatives that lessen the frequency of tiger injuries will aid in lowering.

5. Other preventative measures

   1. Tiger assaults have been deterred by wearing masks on the back of the head and protective helmets, and tigers have been trained to avoid attacking people by using electrified mannequins.

   2. Although dogs have been employed to alert humans to the presence of tigers, in Russia, tigers have attacked many people while trying to feed on dogs.

   3. In Russia, tigers have been effectively deterred from attacking using handheld flares and pepper spray.

4.2.2 Programs that mitigate the impacts of human-tiger conflicts

4.2.2.1 Compensation and insurance programs

1. Compensation programs compensate livestock losses due to predation, medical expenses when people are attacked, and family compensation when a life is lost.

2. Compensation programs typically aim to improve local acceptance of tigers and, as a result, reduce retaliation killing, but with varying degrees of success.

3. Failure reasons include unsustainable high payout costs, difficulty verifying claims, a large number of false claims, government corruption, and the difficulty of making timely payments in rural areas.

4. In terms of compensation for human deaths, it is difficult, and some believe immoral, to place a monetary value on human life; however, failing to compensate for human life loss may give the impression of an extremely indifferent conservation community.

5. Compensation programs offer compensation for livestock losses from theft and medical costs incurred when humans are attacked. Due to the indiscriminate nature of the tactics employed for retribution killing (such as snaring, poisoning, and explosive traps), compensating merely for damage caused by tigers may not diminish tiger reprisal killing.

6. For these reasons, compensation programs are not advised for livestock depredation; nevertheless, if they are employed, they should only offer compensation in situations where there is still depredation despite effective livestock management techniques.

7. Similar issues affect insurance systems, and there is also the issue of a shortage of private insurance providers ready to provide livestock depredation insurance at competitive rates.

8. Insurance payouts must be linked to livestock management strategies that reduce depredation, much like compensation.

4.2.2.2 Incentives programs

1. Through alternative income streams based on “conservation-friendly” activities, such as improved livestock management, incentive programs aim to offset the costs of depredation.

2. Because it has never been proven that incentive programs have a positive effect on tiger populations, the effectiveness of incentives programs as tiger conservation measures is unknown.

3. Incentives programs have also been employed to conserve snow leopards in a number of nations, with success in raising local incomes and increasing the density of natural prey.

4. All of these initiatives are supported, at least initially, although some, like those of the Snow Leopard Trust, have become self-sustaining.

4.2.2.3 Reactive measures

1. A number of issues, including a lack of space, illness, damage, and senility, can occasionally lead to lone tigers entering villages and/or attacking domestic animals or people.

2. Mechanisms for resolving individual conflicts are required wherever tiger populations are present. Lethal control and removal from the wild are the most frequently utilized strategies historically and currently, and both have the same effect on the wild population—namely, lower survival rates.

3. Tigers are occasionally taken out of the wild unnecessarily, and it is frequently difficult to tell whether the tiger that was killed or captured was the offending animal.

4. A variety of nonlethal techniques, such as visual and acoustic deterrents (such as fireworks, signal flares, cracker shells, lights, and sirens), projectiles (such as rubber bullets), protective collars on livestock, and conditioned taste aversion, have been used by carnivores in response to specific conflicts.

5. In cases of human-animal conflict, measures are taken such as scaring the tiger away from the area, capturing it, fitting it with a telemetry device, and releasing or moving it.

6. Telemetry enables managers to keep an eye on the tiger, giving early notice if it tries to approach people or livestock and offering a way to gauge the effectiveness of actions.

7. Young animals, frequently orphaned when their mothers are poached, are frequently believed to be too young to live and are caught, however cubs as young as seven months have survived in the wild without assistance and can sometimes be maintained through feeding programs.

8. Decisions to translocate a tiger, release it onsite, or remove it from the wild must consider the degree of certainty that the captured animal is the offending animal, individual tiger characteristics such as age, sex, physical condition, behavior, and residency status, as well as the availability of suitable release sites, appropriate equipment to capture and transport tigers, and holding facilities for captured animals.

9. Young, dispersal-age tigers are thought to be the best candidates for translocation because these animals are constantly wandering through new habitats.

10. The decision-making process for managing with human-tiger conflict occurrences is complicated, involving a number of biological, social, and political factors (Figure 1). Individual HTC scenarios would be best handled by a team of trained professionals following a set methodology. Tiger response teams should have specific protocols to help them make decisions, as shown in Figure 1 for domestic animal depredations.

Figure 1.

Decision-making chart for livestock depredations (image courtesy Goodrich, [9]).

4.2.2.4 Integrated programs: education and community involvement

1. Most projects will necessitate an educational component, which may be provided as part of a broader tiger conservation education campaign or as part of a specific effort to decrease conflict.

2. Education will be an important component of programs to enhance livestock management as well as compensation, insurance, and incentive programs, as the latter must be directly tied to changes in human behavior that benefit tigers.

3. Human conduct during a tiger encounter can avoid an attack, so training humans how to react when confronted with tigers is essential.

4. Furthermore, people should be educated on tiger conservation regulations, as well as their rights and obligations in relation to human-tiger Conflict.

4.3 Human-elephant conflicts

In elephant range countries, human-elephant conflict is a key conservation concern. A range of management solutions for preventing and minimizing human-elephant conflict have been developed and are used at various scales. However, human-elephant conflict persists because most present prevention measures are driven by site-specific factors that only provide short-term solutions, while mitigation strategies frequently transfer conflict risk from one location to another.

Human settlements and agricultural fields have expanded across Asia and Africa, resulting in extensive loss of elephant habitat, deteriorated fodder, reduced landscape connectivity, and a considerable decline in elephant populations relative to their historical size and overall range. Elephants are increasingly brought into greater contact with humans as their habitats shrink, resulting in more frequent and severe conflict over space and resources, with repercussions ranging from crop raiding to reciprocal loss of life.

Human-elephant conflict has become a concern to biodiversity conservation, and conflict resolution is a top priority for elephant conservation in range countries. Growing understandings of wildlife behavior and the spatiotemporal patterns of human–wildlife conflict have resulted in the suggestion, development, and implementation of a wide range of prevention and mitigation strategies. Current conflict resolution strategies emphasize isolation and on-site deterrents, as well as mitigation through elephant translocation or selective culling and monetary compensation for losses.

However, most management measures only address the symptoms of human-elephant conflict, rather than the underlying causes of conflict such as cultural values, resource use decisions, and the increasing fragmentation and isolation of elephant populations.

The Elephantidae family historically spanned the American, European, Asian, and African continents, but it now only exists in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa (Figure 2). Extant Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) are listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and African savanna (Loxodonta africana) and forest (Loxodonta cyclotis) elephant species are listed as vulnerable [10].

Figure 2.

Global elephant species distribution map. Land cover based on a 500-m resolution mode value MODIS land cover type product (MCD12Q1) from NASA, 2000−2016 [10] (Friedl et al. [11]; elephant population data).

4.3.1 The causes and result of human-elephant conflict

Human-elephant conflict is a critical concern for ensuring elephant survival and persistence in their range countries, as these are also regions where the development and well-being of human groups sharing space with these mega-herbivores are crucial. As humans alter the landscape, bringing human and elephant populations closer together, the potential of conflict increases, with often catastrophic consequences. In India alone, conflict episodes kill 400 people and 100 elephants each year, with crop raiding affecting an additional 500,000 families. Every year, Sri Lanka records around 70 human and 200 elephant deaths as a result of warfare. Illegal ivory poaching complicates projections for elephant losses in Africa.

During dry years, many rural populations relocate to more permanent water sources to provide consistent water supplies for their household needs, crops, and livestock.

However, competition for increasingly scarce water sources and other resources during and/or after droughts increase the potential of elephant-human conflict.

1. Poverty affects household buffering ability and evolutionary capacity to respond to crop-raiding elephant harvest losses, further undermining conservation efforts by instilling intolerance and prejudice against elephants.

2. Humans, like elephants, are ecosystem engineers who have a significant impact on their surroundings. Through direct and indirect competition for water, food, and space, their subsistence activities limit elephant home range and population density.

3. Farmers and pastoralists influence biophysical dynamics and habitat patterns through subsistence agriculture output and resource management.

4. Elephants may be attracted to patches of fresh vegetative growth when trees are cut down and burned to make room for agricultural expansion and increase livestock fodder.

5. Fields being planted close to water sources and holes being dug to access groundwater may change elephant travel paths

6. Habitat fragmentation increases the likelihood of human-elephant conflict because the roads and farms that surround fragmented feeding places are more prone to host hostilities.

7. Crop destruction and human casualties are the two most frequently recorded and widely publicized costs of conflict, but less obvious costs, such as lowered mental well-being and disrupted social activities, raise more questions.

4.3.2 Strategies for conflict prevention and mitigation

4.3.2.1 Conflict resolution techniques

1. Methods of Exclusion.

   1. Ecological pathways and protected areas

      • Wildlife conservation is now linked with the physical separation of humans and wildlife owing to the creation of protected areas and the work of conservationists and wildlife managers. Ecological corridors connect isolated protected areas and fragmented habitats, promote herd connectedness, provide demographic rescue benefits, and improve gene flow.

      • Furthermore, ecological corridors or even fencing for protected areas may lead to “green grabbing,” in which subsistence farmers are denied access to privately or communally held arable lands along elephant migration routes that are walled off to lessen conflict between people and elephants without receiving just compensation.

      • Therefore, deeper comprehension of human-driven land use change is required, along with a greater awareness of how it may affect elephant habitat, connectivity, and migratory patterns.

2. Trenches and electric fences.

   • In order to prevent elephants from invading agriculture and populated areas, physical exclusion techniques like electric fences and trenches are frequently deployed.

   • The use of these physical barriers at a broader scale is hampered by the expensive construction and ongoing maintenance costs, particularly in fragmented landscapes with considerable frontage to farms and forests.

   • Design, responses to reports of fence breaks and fence-breaking animals, as well as general enforcement and management, may all work against long-term efficacy.

   • According to studies, African elephants may try to break an electric fence that surrounds them if they discover that their tusks do not carry electricity, causing the fence to sustain expensive damage.

   • Physical obstacles can have a negative impact on long-term survival because they further isolate already dispersed elephant populations, obstruct movement and access to seasonal food and water supplies, and restrict the exchange of genes across herds. In Asia, the efficiency of fencing has mostly gone untapped.

3. Other techniques.

4.3.2.2 Acoustic barriers

Farmers use loud noises, firecrackers or carbide cannons, smashing metal objects, throwing stones, and yelling to protect their crops and scare away elephants that might raid them. While these methods are efficient in preventing elephants from damaging crops, they also interfere with farmers’ livelihoods and psychosocial well-being. The use of high-tech acoustic deterrents is still challenging. Only short-term and short-distance elephant repellant tests have been conducted using audio playbacks of ominous noises such as wild cat growls, human yells, and vocalizations from matriarchal groups of elephants.

According to some research, elephants adapt rapidly to these noises and come back to plunder farms. Additionally, these playback systems require logistical problems to install, regularly monitor, and maintain in remote locations.

Although the experiments conducted indicated that audio playbacks were 65–100% effective, the potential adverse effects on other species warrant more investigation before widespread adoption.

Recent research in Africa provide encouraging outcomes when elephants are repelled by bioacoustic techniques like beehive fences, which also help pollinators and honeybee habitats.

4.3.2.3 Light-based dissuaders

To protect maturing crops and fend off attacking elephants, farmers may start bonfires and use fiery torches or spotlights. A small number of communal fields have been tried with solar spotlights, which are shone in elephants’ eyes to scare them away from agricultural fields; nevertheless, initial purchase prices restrict widespread adoption by low-income rural households and communities.

Like acoustic deterrents, light-based deterrents are temporary fixes that lose their potency over time when elephants become accustomed to them or relocate to other areas.

4.3.2.4 Agriculture-based deterrents

Agriculture-based deterrents like chili-greased fences and chili dung have not seen as much testing or use as exclusion, acoustic, and light techniques [12].

There is a wide range in the effectiveness of chile deterrents, from little effect to modest reduction in crop-raiding, according to recent field testing. Furthermore, this method is unaffordable for many communities due to high application and maintenance costs.

4.3.2.5 Early identification and alert

Using mobile phones to quickly communicate among farmers and between farmers and local officials is one method for early elephant discovery and warning. This technique encourages collaboration in chasing away possibly troublesome elephants.

In order to recognize and locate people over great distances, elephants employ infrasonic cries, which early warning systems may incorporate by placing detectors in conflict-prone areas. However, in order for these gadgets to send alerts to farmers, they need to be connected to the internet or have network coverage, which makes infrasonic receivers less useful in distant locations.

Similar to radio-collared elephants, satellite tracking enables early warning of potentially troublesome individuals and herds.

4.3.3 Conflict resolution techniques

Affected farmers and local people may request a response from government bodies or nongovernmental groups that deal with elephant conservation after a human-elephant conflict occurrence to lessen potential conflict in the future [13].

The taming, culling, and relocation of troublesome individual elephants or herds are covered in detail below. The topic of conflict mitigation initiatives that financially make up for lost crops or lives is then covered.

4.3.3.1 Translocation

Problematic elephants are drugged, rendered immobile, and transported from farms or human settlements to PAs for release. Initial findings indicate that translocated elephants frequently return to their original territory and tend to spread conflict around the release area as they move toward their original home range, even though the effectiveness and long-term feedback of elephant translocation have not been thoroughly tested. Additionally, translocation frequently defeats conservation objectives due to increased mortality rates for elephants during capture and transportation, as well as occasionally deliberate killing in the release region.

4.3.3.2 Domestication

Domestication methods have been used in Asia for a very long time to reduce or even end hostilities between people and elephants. Although Asian elephants can reproduce in captivity, it is best to capture and domesticate wild females. Asian elephants that were captured and domesticated have integrated well into human society. They currently perform ceremonial duties in temples and at community events, haul heavy loads for use in agriculture, settling disputes, and going on hunting expeditions, and assist in the capture of other wild elephants.

Human-elephant conflict and the resulting negative attitudes toward species conservation are likely influenced by the loss of these beneficial human-elephant relationships in local communities and effective management of wild populations.

4.3.3.3 Compensation

• More market-based methods of reducing human-elephant conflict give individuals harmed financial recompense. The views and attitudes of people who live in conflict-prone areas are essential to the management of human-elephant conflicts, and recouping economic losses helps to promote tolerance for elephants and positive attitudes toward animals.

• In order to get compensation, the property damage and/or loss must first be reported to park officials or another appropriate local authority, who will then conduct a visual inspection of the damage. Conflict and corruption are made possible by the absence of uniform assessment criteria and payment methods.

• Compensation plans frequently focus on the market price for the crops and livestock losses suffered by victims without taking into account the opportunity costs of conflict resolution, the transaction costs of receiving compensation, or the unaddressed costs of decreased psychosocial and social wellbeing. Additionally, it is challenging to put a financial value on and adequately compensate people who have been killed or injured by elephants.

• However, compensation schemes have not been as effective in reducing human-elephant conflict as they have been in other situations where successful compensatory programs have raised tolerance toward violent species.

• Due to inadequate compensation, logistical difficulties, weak governance, a lack of transparency, limited local understanding of the program’s scope and limitations, and bogus claims, compensating schemes sometimes face harsh criticism in nations where elephants roam.

• However, monetary compensation for the harm done does not address the conflict’s fundamental roots, and as a result, does not seem to be a workable or long-term solution.

4.3.3.4 Culling

Elephants that pose a persistent threat to communities, particularly those that have killed people, are regularly slaughtered to allay grievances and stop further conflicts and losses in both Asia and Africa. Africa often employs the slaughter of crop-robbing elephants or those that attack humans to control elephant populations and reduce human-elephant conflict, in contrast to Asia’s emphasis on domestication. African culling customs have their origins in both pre-Colonial and colonial elephant hunting, which helped to ensure food security by supplying affected people with meat and by reducing competition for scarce resources. It also provided ivory for sale. Elephants in southern and eastern Africa were more frequently killed for their ivory as the demand for ivory from the continent increased due to culling for mitigation.

It is debatable and disputed whether culling is effective or necessary for preserving elephant populations and reducing conflict because it mostly targets male elephants because of their large territorial ranges that bring them near to human habitations.

4.3.4 A theory-based model for reducing and mitigating human elephant conflict

The dependence of both species is increased by ongoing and upcoming changes to land use, conservation policy, economic markets, climate issue, and other disruptions. The coexistence of humans and elephants rather than their conflict is the focus of effective strategic planning, which also addresses the fundamental causes of conflict and their spatial variation as well as the overlapping and changing requirements of both species. As per Shaffer et al. [14], conceptual model, which builds on previous work, focuses on encouraging peaceful coexistence and minimizing conflict through landscape-level planning guided by open-data and tools, ethnographic data, and community-based education and mitigation strategies.

Conflict between humans and elephants is caused by the intersection of biophysical processes, livelihood activities, and species population dynamics. The sizes, densities, rates of growth, and frequent movements of elephant herds have an immediate impact on the places, times, and levels of conflict. This intensity takes into account the perceived hazards to human safety as well as the degree of harm done to a home or community and its capacity to withstand more conflict (Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 3.

Image courtesy Shaffer et al. [14]. Human-elephant conflict: a review of current management strategies and future directions.

Figure 4.

Human-bear conflict management plan [15].

However, burn techniques to manage landscapes are pulse events. On the opposite side of the conflict equation, human population dynamics directly influence land usage and resource access during livelihood activities. Decisions about land use and resource access, conflict resolution strategies, perceived risks, and ultimately the sustainability of any initiatives taken to lessen or prevent future conflict are influenced by historical changes to livelihood practices brought on by sociocultural, economic, political, climate, and biophysical changes.

According to site-specific data on attitudes toward elephants and the costs of conflict, it is possible to restructure mitigation and educational programs or introduce new opportunities in areas where communities can profit from the presence of elephants to foster tolerance and increase appreciation for elephants. This data must be gathered objectively, with “boots on the ground,” by observing and learning about the needs and decision-making processes of the community, as well as by identifying local residents who can take the lead in co-creating, co-implementing, and co-managing long-term conflict reduction strategies in their communities.

Therefore, in a coupled natural and human system, the adaptive capacity, resilience, and vulnerability of a variety of biophysical and social components, and the processes that link them together, are crucial for the conservation and long-term sustainability of coexisting human and elephant populations. Our conceptual model focuses on resource rivalry and the ensuing conflict between humans and elephants over access to water, food, and space. Additionally, it discusses press and pulse disruption processes that affect the competition for human and elephant resources.

Alternative tactics may be suggested if conflict hotspots and areas of shared resource usage have been discovered by landscape modeling that incorporates data from both natural and human systems. In order to maintain appropriate water availability during dry years, strategies could include digging new wells and constructing boreholes for human populations or developing new water sources along known elephant migration pathways that could detour these animals away from human regions. Communities could collaborate with governmental organizations and nongovernmental organizations to create policies and programs that safeguard crucial elephant range areas and ecological corridors while promoting human well-being by creating new employment opportunities and ensuring sustainable access to resources that are significant to local culture.

4.4 Human-bear conflict

Conflicts between people and bears appear to have received less attention globally than disputes involving other big predators like felids and canids. On four continents, millions of humans coexist with bears; some do so happily, while others must deal with protracted disputes. Conflicts between locally or globally endangered animals create questions about conservation. “Any circumstance where wild bears utilize or damage human property; where wild bears harm people; or where people believe bears to be a direct threat to their property or safety” is what we refer to as a “human-bear conflict”.

Sloth bears are notoriously vicious animals. Sloth bears are among the most feared of all wild creatures in central India, where they have a dreadful reputation. Particularly when the mother and cubs are present, they are incredibly unpredictable when it comes to attacking people. Conflict between humans and bears has been documented all across the world. The Asiatic black bear, one of the main mammals of the Himalayan woods, coexists in its habitat with a wide variety of other plant and animal species.

The Asiatic black bear has been reported to be widely spread throughout southern and eastern Asia, with scattered populations in Taiwan and Baluchistan Province of Iran in the west and Indo-China in the east to much of China, Korea, and Japan [16].

Bears typically attacked when they were suddenly confronted, and the attacks were presumably a defensive reaction. Attacks on people engaged in different activities were more likely to occur when they used varied environments more intensely.

Future human-bear conflict management projects should take following points into account.

1. According to a review of conflict management plans, actions targeted at communities (such as deterrents, physical barriers, education/awareness campaigns, and compensation/insurance programs), habitats (such as habitat management), and bears (such as diversionary feeding, relocation/translocation, aversive behavioral conditioning, removal of specific individuals, and population management) make up conflict mitigation

2. The following five characteristics were also discovered through our critical evaluation and should be taken into account in upcoming conflict management activities

4.4.1 Conflict between humans and bears

• In regions where killing bears threaten their survival, incentives must be developed to promote tolerance among local groups. Bears fit well into the biodiversity effects compensation model, which matches conservation issues with appropriate remedies.

• It emphasizes a ladder of mitigation approaches, from removing the problematic animal to compensating the impacted stakeholder. One tactic for promoting coexistence is to recompense those who have been harmed by carnivores [17].

• Financial incentives should be adapted to each context in order to balance people’s cultural and economic requirements while achieving the intended conservation goals. Conflict management programs can be modified to include payments for environmental services.

4.4.2 Community involvement in conflict management

• The public’s confidence that bear supervisors are acting to ensure public safety and that impacted local stakeholders participate in the conflict management process by effectively preserving their property are both crucial for conservation [18].

• In North America, responsibility sharing is seen as a crucial component of success in conflict management.

• In South America and Asia, forming partnerships between management, locals, and conservationists is crucial since rural residents there would otherwise interpret conservation efforts as punitive limits on their use of the land, imposed by the government or foreigners.

4.4.3 Welfare aspect of conflict and its management

• Although this is pertinent to every planned action that might have an impact on bears, the management plans for human-bear conflicts said little about bear wellbeing.

• The ethical aspects of conservation research have frequently been overlooked, in contrast to other academic disciplines (such as medicine), despite the fact that they constitute a crucial part of conservation biology.

• Populations are at the heart of conservation, but since these populations are emergent characteristics of particular persons, their wellbeing is not only important but also better understood by the general public than is the case with abstract populations.

• Even if it is difficult, it is important to consider the welfare effects of conflict. Many of the behavioral processes relevant to conservation are also of interest to welfare science.

4.4.4 Effectiveness of educational initiatives

• The most frequently mentioned strategy for resolving human-bear conflict is education. The goal of public education should be to raise awareness and aid in the prevention of collisions, damage, and injuries.

• Making conservation education effective is a subject that deserves additional research because not all educational initiatives result in the intended behavioral change. The process of education should be dynamic and interactive, and new instruments must be created and their efficacy tested.

• Wildlife authorities should tailor education campaigns to specific sectors of society by identifying and addressing their values and then monitor results by documenting both failures and achievements within the context of adaptive management.

4.4.5 Improving human-bear conflict management plans

• Organizational clarity would be improved by using graphic designs and logical schemata more frequently [19].

• Plans for managing conflicts between humans and bears could be categorized as logic models, which are instruments for arranging data in an if-then chain of interaction relationships. A logic model identifies a list of steps that must be done, specifies feasible results, and guarantees that these results ensure the desired result.

• Plans need to be clear about each action’s execution in terms of where, when, and who will be responsible for it. Within this framework, a human-bear conflict management strategy should be clear about the vision, goals, objectives, activities, outcomes, and outputs as well as the frameworks for institutional and individual accountability.

4.4.6 Policy implications regarding human bear conflict

• Depending on the species, the demands of the population, the priorities of wildlife agencies, and the accessibility of different conflict management components, policy objectives for managing human-bear conflicts may vary from one region to another. Whatever the policy goals, reducing bear conflicts—and human–wildlife conflict in general—will depend on a comprehensive strategy that is sensitive to both human requirements and bear needs.

• International conservation organizations and institutions must encourage and support conflict management in regions where it is a threat to bear populations, and organizations like the IUCN and the World Bank for International Development must assist governments and rural communities in managing conflicts.

• It is necessary for wildlife agencies in charge of bear protection, particularly in South America and Asia, to actively include local stakeholders in methods that promote tolerance for bears and other nearby animals.

• When interacting with colleagues in the developing world, it is equally important for those who work in regions with better infrastructure and technological capabilities to apply the best knowledge in a prudent, realistic, sensitive, and, above all, useful manner to their very different work environments.

• We all share the desire to promote the cohabitation of bears and humans on a global scale, and while comparable concepts may help to achieve this aim, for them to be effective, they must be cleverly tailored to local conditions.

4.5 Human-rhinoceros conflict

The greater one-horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis), one of the five remaining rhinoceros species, had its status changed from “endangered” to “vulnerable” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in 2008. Asian rhino species like to live on alluvial plain grasslands, as well as nearby swamps and woodlands, where there is year-round access to water and lush vegetation. Between the Indo-Myanmar border in the east to the Sindh River Basin, Pakistan in the west, they were once common throughout the northern flood plains and close to the foothills of the Indian subcontinent.

Conflict between people and wildlife must be resolved in order to protect rhino populations and local communities way of life. To address the issues of human–wildlife conflict, local people’s involvement and their collaboration with PA officials are essential. Conflict between people and animals can be resolved in a way that benefits both the residents and the rhinos.

Indian rhinos, also known as Greater one-horned rhinos, are arguably the most ancient species of rhino. Their skin resembles a thick armor plate and is similar to that of dinosaurs. But what distinguishes and sets them apart from other rhino species is the single horn. Greater one-horned rhinos are classified as vulnerable, as opposed to the critically endangered black rhinos, mostly because to the decreased threat of poaching.

4.5.1 Reason for huma rhino conflict

Elephants favored all crop kinds in a mature stage of growth and specifically harmed rice, maize, and wheat. Contrarily, rhinos preferred wheat over rice, and like antelope and deer, they chose crops that were still growing but not quite ripe. The larger one-horned rhinos were simple to spot in their favorite wheat fields as well as in lentil, rice, and mustard fields. Once they were in the field, chasing them away did not lessen the amount of damage that was done. Although male rhinos during mating season would also fight aggressors, adolescent rhinos remained largely shy and mothers with calves could be especially hostile. Rhinos appeared to cause more damage when being pursued by a group of humans with the intention of driving them back to their natural hiding places in the national park than when left alone and unmolested. This suggests a mistaken effort by neighborhood farmers that needs to be looked into more thoroughly.

The most effective deterrent, according to, was burning bundles of thatch grass carried by guards to frighten rhinos away from farms in Chitwan/Nepal after he observed several traditional techniques of doing so.

4.5.2 Mitigation strategies

In areas where greater one-horned rhino is present, crop protection measures need to be in place in the early stage of farming. At a later stage, when crops are maturing, protection measures could be lowered, but need to be enforced again during the time after harvest, when 40 crops are laid out for drying in the fields. In African wildlife areas populated by hippos, such as close to entry points at rivers (Kendall, [20]) or at hippo pools, measures for crop protection need to be taken from an early stage of growth onwards.

4.5.2.1 Electrical fencing

Many African and Asian nations have advocated the use of electric fences to keep large herbivores off agriculture and in protected areas. In order to protect crops from hippos, rhinos, and large antelopes, fencing is advised.

Although these installations might initially lessen crop loss, they have not been shown to be totally secure against any of the aforementioned species over a lengthy period of time. The management’s labor- and money-intensive nature is one of the key problems.

This is particularly true during the wet season, when the grasses grow swiftly and energy is easily lost, leading to fence that is ineffectual. Furthermore, since they cannot quickly escape the barrier when pursued, the animals would suffer even greater injury.

4.5.2.2 Restoring landscapes

More room was required for breeding and habitation as the rhino population grew. All the organizations involved began rebuilding rhino habitats not only in India but also in Nepal. In order for these critters to relocate to higher ground during floods, habitat corridors were secured.

4.5.2.3 Working with locals

Human settlements surround the protected regions for larger one-horned rhinos in India and Nepal. Therefore, it was crucial for the survival of rhinos in India that the people living close to the rhino reserve have compassion for the animal. Numerous initiatives are being undertaken to protect Indian rhinos while also providing villagers with a means of subsistence by asking them to cultivate a number of particular plant species that aid in anti-poaching operations. Additionally, this lessens conflicts between people and rhinos.

4.5.2.4 Reducing unlawful trade

The concerned group is working with TRAFFIC, a network that monitors wildlife traffic, to take a number of steps to limit the illegal trade in rhino horn. To stop the illegal trafficking of rhino horns in Asian black markets, an intelligence network and anti-poaching patrols are deployed from key areas.

5. Conservation

Humans actively work to preserve wild species and their habitats through the practice of wildlife conservation. The ecological equilibrium is maintained in large part by wildlife. There are many benefits to conservation for preserving a healthy ecosystem, genetic resources, recreation, and education. The main causes of wildlife extinction include habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching, illegal trade, conflicts between people and wildlife, and pollutants. The main methods for ensuring the survival of animals include protecting vital ecosystems, wise planning and management for captive breeding, and prevention of poaching and illegal trade.

Animals, plants, and their habitats are preserved and protected through wildlife conservation. The main goals of wildlife conservation are to protect the habitat, preserve the breeding population, and outlaw the slaughter and unlawful exchange of animals [21]. Therefore, protecting wildlife has to take into account both biotic (plants, animals, and microorganisms) and abiotic (human-caused) elements. As a result, protecting wildlife resources is closely linked to protecting other natural resources.

The ecological equilibrium is maintained in large part by wildlife. Every living thing on this planet has a specific role in the food chain and makes a distinctive contribution to the ecosystem in that role. An illustration will help us to understand. When carnivores are killed, the number of herbivores increases, which in turn affects the vegetation in the forest. As a result, when there is insufficient food in the forest, the herbivores leave the forest and invade agricultural land, where they destroy the crops. When stability and balance are disturbed, numerous issues result. Unfortunately, many natural species are becoming endangered today. The main causes of wildlife extinction include habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching, illegal trade, conflicts between people and animals, and pollutants [22].

The greatest danger to wildlife is habitat degradation. There is no doubt that the extinction of wildlife species will be disastrous to this habitat. In order to maintain the conservation of wildlife and natural resources, it is imperative that we as people act responsibly.

6. Requirement for conservation

1. Balance of ecological nature

   The preservation of an ecosystem’s natural equilibrium is of utmost importance. A species’ population decline disrupts the natural food chain and the ecosystem, putting other species at risk. This equilibrium could be upset by the arrival of new species, the unexpected extinction of some species, natural disasters, or man-made causes. For instance, tiger and lion attacks on humans and domesticated animals occur when all the herbivorous animals in a forest are killed. In a similar manner, the killing of snakes for their skin helps the rat population to skyrocket.

2. Biological value

   Wildlife is regarded as an ecological asset and a gauge of the health of the environment. The biological value of wildlife is concerned with their role in sustaining productive ecosystems through activities including pollination, seed dissemination and planting, population management of animals and plants, nutrient recycling, and scavenging for waste [21].

3. Monetary worth

   Wildlife is abundant throughout the nation and a reliable source of income [23]. Nowadays, wildlife has grown to be a significant source of income. For commercial purposes, wildlife is harvested for its timber, firewood, hides, ivory, horns, and fur, among other products. Zoos and museums are able to keep both live and dead animals on display.

4. Educational benefit

   Numerous scientific studies and research employ wild animals. Rhesus monkeys, for instance, are frequently utilized in biomedical research.

5. Recreation

   For humans, wildlife serves as a source of entertainment and recreation. Visits to locations dedicated to animal protection are extremely beneficial to many professionals, including photographers and bird watchers.

6.1 Conservation techniques

1. Protect habitats for wildlife

   The main factor contributing to a decline in wildlife population is habitat damage. Human activity that contributes to habitat destruction includes logging, industrialization, urbanization, using forested areas for agriculture to meet human needs, and mining. Some of the natural reasons include forest fires and weather changes. One approach to safeguard our wildlife is through raising plants and saving trees, protecting the last remaining unaltered areas of natural habitat, developing new techniques to boost agricultural output without using more land, and building wildlife corridors. Since isolated populations can migrate along habitat corridors, genetic diversity is increased, and human–wildlife interactions are reduced [23]. In the forest, cultivating some flowering plants will draw insects that can aid in pollination.

2. Preventing illicit trading

   Poaching is the next biggest hazard to wild animals after habitat loss. This unlawful conduct is being carried out for a variety of absurd reasons, particularly for rare animal items like ivory, fur, organs, skin, and bones. On the other side, some animals have been hunted for food, for religious reasons, and because of some unfounded claims about their therapeutic worth. However, the truth is that there is no evidence to support the medical usefulness of animal organs 2019 [24]. Trackers that are safe and undetectable must be employed to monitor animal activity in order to stop these actions. Poaching can be dramatically decreased by outlawing the sale and purchase of wildlife animal parts in underground markets. Wild plant and animal commerce must be subject to adequate legislative and administrative controls.

3. Lowering pollution

   The amount of waste produced worldwide is primarily rising daily. 5.25 trillion bits of plastic garbage are exclusively found in the oceans, according to a survey. It seriously endangers aquatic life. Other than oil spills, untreated sewage, and industrial chemicals, harmful pollutants including carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and ozone are also produced. These pollutants have an impact on both people and animals. The endocrine system is disturbed, sex ratios vary, and reproductive parameters are diminished in animals, and teratogenic, genotoxic consequences, immunosuppression, and other immune-related illnesses are also present [25].

   The efforts to be taken to lessen environmental pollution include limiting the use of plastics, recycling and reusing garbage, cleaning up the ocean, employing bacteria and some plants to break down chemical pollutants, and treating industrial wastewater to reduce pollutants. The fact that all garbage is produced by people alone means that we alone should take responsibility for keeping the environment clean.

4. Awareness

   Knowledge raising awareness among those who engage in superstitious behavior, animal poisoning to protect their livestock, and poaching. Children should be taught and given the necessary training to educate others about the importance of wildlife and its management. A significant influence will be produced by educating the next generation and integrating them into wildlife conservation initiatives. Future residents’ perceptions of the value of wildlife will be shaped by the inclusion of wildlife education in the school curriculum. Encouraging community involvement in wildlife management and conservation will undoubtedly enhance the status of wild species.

5. Adoption

   One way to preserve the wild species held in captivity is through adoption. Many nations, including India, permit the adoption of zoo birds and wild animals. By adopting animals and feeding them on a monthly or annual basis, one can make several contributions to the conservation of wildlife. Zoos and species have different paying policies and procedures. The operation of conservation efforts, including captive breeding programs for endangered species in various zoos, will undoubtedly be aided by animal adoption programs. A person’s adaptation of animals not only demonstrates his or her love for wildlife but also encourages others to do the same. The conservation of wildlife will benefit greatly from this tiny action.

6. Captivity

   Animals are bred in human-controlled environments as part of the process known as captive breeding. As animal populations can grow faster than in the wild, it has been a popular management strategy for endangered species in recent years. Typically, captive breeding operations are not started until the natural population has declined to unsustainable levels [26]. In order to safeguard the population against genetic illness, captive breeding requires significantly greater attention. But it’s crucial to understand that captive reproduction is insufficient to guarantee the long-term survival of endangered species.

7. Conclusion

Being a part of nature, it is natural for humans to come into contact with animals. However, because we do not fully understand animal behavior, we often feel threatened by their antics and the damage they cause to our property. We do not realize that some of our actions, even unconscious ones, may make animals feel threatened and lead to retaliation on their part. Therefore, educating the general public about such conflicts is crucial to solving the issue. If we can learn why some animals attack us and take appropriate action to stop them, we can develop positive and loving relationships with animals, which will be beneficial in the long run as we will learn how to treat them with respect and care.

There is no yet other form of mitigation, despite the fact that mitigation measures are crucial. In order to achieve the optimum results, many of the measures must be combined. Installing structures to deter birds, for instance, might be effective in the short term, but if residents continue to feed pigeons repeatedly, the problem will not be resolved. When choosing mitigation strategies, an inclusive and comprehensive approach must be used.

In the end, reducing human–wildlife conflict is a difficult endeavor since both animals and people need time to alter their habitats and behavior, therefore all the remedies must be implemented regularly over a lengthy period of time before any results can be noticed. Therefore, both residents and decision-makers must have tolerance and understanding when resolving animal conflicts.