Search

Surface ozone is a damaging pollutant for crops and ecosystems, and the ozone-induced crop losses over India remain uncertain and a topic of debate due to a lack of sufficient observations and uncertainties involved in the modeled results. In this study, we have used the observational data from MAPAN (Modelling Air Pollution And Networking) for the first time to estimate the relative yield losses, crop production losses, and economic losses for the two major crops (wheat and rice). The detailed estimation has been done focusing on three individual suburban sites over India (Patiala, Tezpur, and Delhi) and compared with other related studies over the Indian region. We have used the concentration-based metric (M7, 7-h average from 09:00 to 15:59 h) along with the cumulative ozone exposure indices (AOT40, accumulated exposure over a threshold of 40 ppb) and applied the exposure–response (E-R) functions for the calculation of the crop losses. Our study shows that the yearly crop losses can reach the level of 12.4–40.8% and 2.0–11.1% for the wheat and rice crops, respectively, at certain places like Patiala in India. The annual economic loss can be as high as $4.6 million and $0.7 million for wheat and rice crops, respectively, even at individual locations in India. Our estimated %RYL (relative yield loss) lies in the range of 0.3 + /0.6 times the recent regional model estimates which use only the AOT40 metric. Region-specific E-R functions based on factors suitable for the Indian region needs to be developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large scale destruction of the forest along with encroachments has resulted in higher incidences of human-elephant conflict in Northeast India. People living in proximity to the forests are the worst victim. A study was carried out during 2018–19 to find out the people's perception on human-elephant conflict in 10 selected fringe villages of the Rani-Garbhanga area of Assam, India. A questionnaire was prepared covering different parameters on human-elephant conflict (HEC). Study found that elephants were attracted the most by paddy, followed by home garden vegetables, stored grain, country liquor, and mud chulla (mud-oven used in village kitchens). An increasing trend of conflict over the period was observed where the majority of the respondents experienced significant crop damage annually. Most of the respondents were not very happy with the compensation practices for crop loss through ex-gratia payment from the government agencies which is often delayed or not paid at all. This delay or non-payment of ex-gratia has resulted in intensifying negative attitudes towards elephant and thus one-third of the total people of the area consider elephants as enemies, and do not vouch for their conservation. An immediate conservation initiative is suggested to conserve Asiatic elephants of this region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Damage of fall armyworm (FAW), Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) on sorghum from the farmers' fields of southern India was assessed using space-borne data. Comparison of the Sentinel-2A satellite data of pre and post infestation periods revealed reduction in Leaf Area Index (LAI) in the infested fields. Groundtruth data confirmed that FAW infestation reduced LAI by 49.7%, biomass by 32.5% and grain yield by 51.8%. Infestation at Panicle Initiation (PI) stage caused maximum yield loss compared to flag leaf visible and boot stages. The interaction results showed FAW infestation at different crop stages had significant effect on biomass and yield, but not on LAI. Regression analysis with spectral vegetation indices revealed LAI (R2: 0.82) and NDVI (R2: 0.80) were significantly superior in identifying FAW infestation from the satellite data. This study demonstrates feasibility of site specific pest management and prevents further spread of the invasive FAW. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An attempt has been made to analyze the temporal and spatial patterns of human-elephant conflict (HEC) and mitigation measures adopted in West Bengal, a thickly populated and agrarian state of India. West Bengal supports only 2% elephant population of India but contributes to the highest human casualties due to HEC. A total of 726 human deaths, 1233 human injuries, 51,542.027 ha areas of crop loss, 34,446 hut damage, and 136 unnatural elephant deaths were reported in West Bengal during April 2010 to March 2019 due to direct HEC. Electrocution was the leading cause of unnatural elephant deaths, followed by train accidents and poaching. South Bengal witnessed maximum crop raiding by elephants. About INR 59.09 crores were compensated by the government to the victims of wild elephant depredation during the same period. Both human and elephant population is increasing and resulting in higher HEC. Natural elephant habitats become fragmented and even degraded due to rapid urbanization and human intervention. Increasing HECs not only cause a negative impact on the agro-based and forest-based household economy of rural people living in conflict prone areas of almost thirteen districts of the state, but also pose a major threat to elephant conservation. Apart from traditional short-term elephant driving practices, several long-term cost-effective and innovative mitigation measures should also be taken involving local communities and other stakeholders for proper management of natural elephant habitat, restoration of elephant corridors, protection of elephants, reduction of HEC, and sustainable development in the state of West Bengal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Human-Elephant conflicts (HECs) are high-risk for agrarian landscape near elephant corridor. • People who grew more diverse crops near to their household had more human-elephant interaction. • Lower elevation with higher human density had more human-elephant conflict. • Local farmers must be supplemented with longer-term village-level crop protection and promote farming of alternative produces and diverse livelihoods. • Early Warning Systems using mobile technology and/or drones can be helpful in high conflict areas to function as deterrents. Understanding the dynamics that drive human-wildlife conflict and identifying potential mitigation solutions requires understanding the spatial patterns of conflict. The juxtaposition of ecological preservation and economic growth has led to increased conflicts between humans and Asian elephants Elephas maximus in the Rajaji-Corbett landscape of Uttarakhand, India, where the conversion of elephant habitat to agricultural land have increased over the last several decades. We investigated the predictors influencing household-level human-elephant conflicts (HECs) using binomial Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) collected from semi-structured questionnaire-based surveys of 266 households in the human-wildlife interface next to protected areas. Further, we modelled the landscape predictors that influence the spatial distribution of HECs by collecting occurrence data of HECs in 25 km2 grid units (N = 1473 grids) using Maxent software. We discovered that HECs are directly influenced by the diversity of major and minor crops planted and the proximity to agricultural land (conflicts decreased with increasing distance from the agricultural land). We also observed that the probability of HECs decreased with increasing elevation, increase in road networks, and with increasing slope in the study area; while HECs increased with increase in human population. We discovered that nearly one-fifth of areas sampled (3606.87 km2) in the Rajaji-Corbett landscape were at high risk of HEC, especially flat, agrarian areas where most people reside. Farmers in the susceptible risk areas identified by our study could lessen the likelihood of crop damage and HEC incidents by cultivating highly profitable alternative crops that are less attractive to elephants. Additionally, implementing mobile-based Early Warning System in high HEC hotspot areas could mitigate crop raiding and potentially reduce the occurrence of HECs. The findings of our study can assist policymakers and park management in designing landscape-scale human-wildlife conflict mitigation strategies tailored to identified conflict hotspots. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Ecoscience (Ecoscience) is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Human–wildlife interactions affect people's livelihoods, attitudes and tolerance towards wildlife and wildlife reserves. To investigate the effect of such interactions on people's attitudes and livelihoods, we surveyed 2,233 households located around four wildlife reserves in Rajasthan, India. We modelled respondents' attitudes towards wildlife and wildlife reserves, experience of crop damage and livestock predation, and likelihood of mitigation use. Crop damage was reported by 76% of surveyed households, and livestock predation was reported by 15%. Seventy-one percent of households used at least one of eight mitigation measures against crop damage, and 19% used at least one of seven mitigation measures against livestock predation. We found that male respondents and households with a higher level of education valued wildlife and wildlife reserves more. Households at higher elevations and growing a greater variety of crops were more prone to crop damage. Proximity to reserves, elevation and larger livestock herds were associated with a higher incidence of livestock predation. Households in which a member had > 12 years of schooling and households with a history (6–10 years) of interaction with wildlife (i.e. crop damage) were most likely to use mitigation against crop damage. Households that owned more livestock and had a history of interaction (1–5 years and > 10 years) were most likely to mitigate against predation. Our comparative study provides insights into factors that influence interaction and tolerance, which could be used to improve existing management and prevention efforts in Rajasthan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preventing loss of crops, threats to livestock, damage to property, and human injury and death attributed to wildlife are conservation challenges. We surveyed over 5,000 households around 11 reserves in India to examine these issues and mitigation efforts. Crops were lost by 71% of households, livestock by 17%, and human injury and death were reported by 3% of households (losses attributed to 32 species). Households deployed 12 mitigation measures with nighttime watching, scare devices, and fencing used the most. A household’s conflict history (>20 years for livestock loss, 10–20 years for crop loss), proximity to reserves, and crops grown or livestock owned were associated with higher mitigation use. There were differences across reserves, with households in Rajasthan least likely to use mitigation. Crop protection (88%) was more likely than livestock protection (32%). Investments in conflict mitigation should consider the history, location, species, socioeconomic variations among households, and differences in regional policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human-rhesus macaque conflict due to crop raiding is a major problem affecting northern India, particularly the states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Management techniques are challenging both due to the commensal nature of the macaque as well as the culturally significant status of the species in India. Studies on wildlife crop raiding indicate that people's reactions to crop raiding are strongly influenced by their attitudes towards the species involved and that insights into these perceptions are critical to work towards conflict-resolution measures. Hence, we investigated the attitudes and perceptions of farmers in Bilaspur district, Himachal Pradesh, towards the rhesus macaque ( Macaca mulatta) and the impact of macaque crop raiding on their lives. We interviewed 54 farmer-families from five villages in Bilaspur and collected data on the extent of crop damage caused by wildlife species, farmers' attitudes towards the rhesus macaque and conflict-mitigation strategies as suggested by the farmers. The results of our study indicate that farmers hold ambivalent attitudes towards the rhesus macaque and mixed opinions regarding its management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The global effort to protect megaherbivore populations is largely dependent on how human-wildlife conflict is identified, prioritized, and remedied. We examined the socio-ecological and landscape-scale factors determining spatial patterns of human-megaherbivore (Asian elephant Elephas maximus and gaur Bos gaurus) interactions across sixteen Forest Divisions in Tamil Nadu, India. Using a systematic grid-based design, we conducted questionnaire-based surveys of 1460 households at the human-wildlife interface adjacent to Protected Areas, Reserve Forest and Fringe Areas. We specifically collected information on elephant and gaur conflict incidents (e.g., human death/injuries, property damage, and crop-raiding), cropland type, extent of crop area and area lost to crop-raiding, from each household. We found that human-elephant conflict increased with percentage of crop cover, diversity of major and minor crops grown, proximity to water source, flat terrain, and lower rates of precipitation. Human-gaur conflict was greatest with a high diversity of major crops, proximity to water source, moderate precipitation, and more undulating terrain. We identified ca. 7900 km 2 hotspot area of contiguous high-intensity elephant conflict. For gaur, we identified high-frequency conflict hotspot areas covering ca. 625 km 2 , which were patchily distributed, highly localised, and attributed mostly to the recent changing land-use patterns. Our findings will help policymakers and park managers in developing landscape-scale human-wildlife conflict mitigation plans in the identified conflict hotspots., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Copyright of Acta Silvatica et Lignaria Hungarica is the property of Sciendo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)