Mumbai residents learn to live with leopards | Janaki Lenin

Residents reported seeing a leopard prowling around their village of Marodi, Karnataka. One news report claimed the animal had not taken any livestock, while another said the cat had killed a calf. Importantly, the animal hadn’t threatened a human or displayed aberrant behaviour. The Wildlife Protection Act expressly says an animal that enjoys a high degree of protection such as the leopard has to pose a threat to human life before it can be caught. However, on New Year’s Eve, the forest department caught the animal. When the vehicle carrying the leopard crossed Kadari bridge, villagers blocked the road and refused to let the automobile pass. They accused the officials of releasing too many wild animals in the vicinity of their village. The officials accompanying the leopard said they were en route to Kudremukh national park where they intended to release the animal. When villagers didn’t relent, forest officials had no option but to take the animal to a nearby zoo. This is just one of many instances of predators being moved from one place to another. One such recent incident involving a tiger ended in tragedy. Biologists say cats have a strong homing instinct and moving them around isn’t a solution. Either they return home, even walking hundreds of miles, or wander restlessly in other villages. Removing a leopard doesn’t mean there are no other spotted cats around. Often, two or three young leopards take over an adult’s range, so an area that had only one animal may host more. This defeats the original intention of clearing a village of predators. If the mere presence of an animal makes residents nervous, what should forest officials do? Moving the animal elsewhere doesn’t solve the problem, and zoos don’t want any more large cats. Forest officials at Sanjay Gandhi national park (SGNP) in Mumbai city faced a similar quandary. The 104 sq km-park is ringed by apartment complexes and slum tenements, while there are tribal settlements within its boundaries. A spate of leopard attacks had made people nervous even after about 30 cats were taken into captivity. In 2011, Sunil Limaye was posted as the director of the park. He says, I received complaints every day. People claimed leopards were straying from the park and there was no prey for the cats. They wanted us to take all the leopards back to the park every evening.” He felt people’s perceptions of leopard behaviour needed to be changed and sought the help of Vidya Athreya, a researcher who was studying leopards in the farmlands of Akole, Maharashtra. Limaye suggested a transparent participatory programme including residents, leopard biologists, social scientists, media, the municipal corporation of greater Mumbai, police, and forest department. With state support of approximately $5,000 (£3,000), a citizen-researcher-forest department initiative called Mumbaikars for SGNP began. Researchers counted leopards, assessed the number of prey animals, mapped where attacks occurred, examined road kills, and analysed the cats’ diet. A volunteer group of students and professionals gave talks about leopard ecology and instructed residents living in the neighbourhood: don’t walk alone after dark, and supervise children at all times. They distributed colourful brochures with information about how traditional societies live with these cats. Vidya Venkatesh, an IT professional who coordinated the volunteer group, says, “We explain to residents that it’s really easy to take away a leopard but the costs are high. Mothers can be separated from their cubs. There is nowhere else to release the animals. The reason for leopards venturing out of the park is because they have plenty of stray dogs to prey on. The reason there are numerous stray dogs is because of rubbish. Once we explain the situation to them, they understand.” Vidya Athreya says, “We stressed that most human attacks occurred when a number of leopards were captured and released in the park. If we don’t want leopards to visit our homes, we need to do something to address the cause, like clean up rubbish.” In case anyone saw a leopard, they could call any of the widely-publicised emergency phone numbers. Immediately, volunteers rushed to the area to assess if any human lives were in danger. Usually, they reassured residents that the leopard posed no problems. Venkatesh says, “We point out to them that there were 21 leopards in the park and they haven’t attacked anyone. Trains kill many more people but we don’t demand they be stopped.” Mahesh Vijapurkar, a resident living close to the park, says, “Mumbaikars for SGNP is an excellent initiative. Lots of sane voices spoke during a time of crisis and assuaged immediate fears. ” Athreya states that the media usually sensationalised any event involving a leopard. About 30 reporters of English and Marathi newspapers and television channels attended workshops on reporting residents’ anxieties sensitively without demonising leopards. News reports began focusing on civic issues such as rubbish clearance. In the adjacent wooded Aarey Milk Colony, children had to walk through tall grass to school. When the media raised the issue, the state bus transport corporation introduced a bus service to ferry these children. Mumbaikars for SGNP also interfaced with the civic authorities to provide street lights near settlements so neither leopards nor people surprised each other. Volunteers worked with housing complexes and the city corporation to clear rubbish. When a leopard was cornered in a congested urban area, the police often stood by. The initiative held workshops for personnel from nine stations in the area. Until then the police hadn’t realised the important role they play in controlling the mob that immediately gathers during a rescue operation. When law and order was taken out of their hands, wildlife managers could focus on the safe capture of the animal, without interference from onlookers. Residents haven’t become blase about leopards, but the edge has been taken off their fear. When others listen to their concerns, they cooperate. Mumbaikars for SGNP demonstrated it isn’t the sole responsibility of the forest department to ensure no human or animal comes to harm. Since the initiative built a relationship with residents, demands to trap leopards have lessened. Although the project officially ran for only a year, volunteers continue to talk to people and conduct workshops. Dialogue and transparent functioning calmed frayed nerves, and people grew tolerant of leopards in Mumbai. Had the forest department in Karnataka taken a similar initiative to engage with people, defuse media hype, and coordinate with other government departments, the Marodi leopard would not be languishing in a zoo.