The fact that national-and state-level policy to tackle the monkey menace in the last five years has been driven by orders from the judiciary and
not from the legislature is indicative of both the extent of the problem and the lack of interest displayed by the Union ministry of environment and
forests (moef). Following a public interest litigation (pil) in the Himachal High Court in
November 2003, the state's forest department and moef, submitted the 'Action Plan to Tackle the Monkey Menace in
Shimla and Shimla Kalka Highway'. In April 2004, a completely separate petition was filed in the Supreme Court and the ministry had submitted the
National Action Plan for Controlling [the] Stray Animal Menace (monkeys, dogs, cattle and pigs). Strangely, the national plan is virtually identical to
Himachal's.It makes for strange reading in a national-level document to come across the words 'Shimla' and 'Shimla-Kalka highway' so often. Would
the ministry have us believe that there is no human-monkey conflict in other states?
The plan is also replete with errors. Since the animal welfare division of the ministry has authored it, wild animals (monkeys) have been lumped with
domestic ones. In submitting to the Supreme Court that the onus of managing monkeys lies with the municipal authorities, moef seems to be absolving itself of its primary focus--wildlife conservation and management. The problem should, in fact, be
under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and state forest departments. It is important to understand that all species of non-human primates (a
better term than 'monkeys') have the potential of becoming commensal (the ability to live close to humans) and thereby create conflict. However,
different species of non-human primates have distinct conservation requirements: the lion-tailed macaques of the southern Western Ghats, the
central himalayan langur of Himachal and the golden langurs of western Assam must therefore be dealt with quite differently from rhesus macaques.
By clubbing together all these different species as 'monkeys', endangered and threatened species have been exposed to control-measures that are
detrimental to their conservation.
Astonishingly, the national plan suggests that male sterilisations be conducted to control the conflict. Because monkeys are polygynous (females
mate with many males), it is females that need to be targeted for sterilisation. The national plan, however, claims that the sterilisation of males
makes greater economic sense because there are apparently fewer males.Anyway, sterilisation is a long-term population stabilisation measure and
can do little to contain the immediate conflict: sterilised monkeys can bite as hard as non-sterilised ones, and can raid crop fields with equal ease.
Most damaging to wildlife conservation is the urban bias the plan introduces into the definition of conflict: only biting, harassment and the
destruction of property in cities is deemed a 'menace'. Two recent events are symptomatic of the problem with this line of thinking: the recent
Uttarakhand polls saw, for perhaps the first time, the inclusion of monkey control as part of the election manifesto of major political parties; and, in
December 2006, about 9,000 farmers took to the streets to protest government inaction in tackling the menace in Himachal Pradesh. It would serve
the ministry well to remember that the only constituents who can ensure conservation in the long-term are communities living close to wilderness
areas--ignoring the problems created by crop raiding. Creating additional problems by moving more monkeys to rural areas will erode any positive
feelings rural people have for wildlife.
Sujoy Chaudhuri is managing trustee, Ecollage, an NGO based in Pune
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.