Crop Damage by Wild Animals in Thrissur District, Kerala, India

  • Suresh K. Govind
  • E. A. JaysonEmail author


Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is a contentious issue, and crop damage by wild animals is a major problem in Kerala, India. A study on crop damage by wild animals was carried out in Thrissur District, Kerala, India, from April 2009 to March 2012, to assess the crop damage by wild animals and the economic loss incurred to the farmers due to wild animals. For assessing the crop damage, quadrats of 10 m x 10 m were taken randomly in the fringe areas of eight Forest Ranges. Incidences of crop damage were recorded from the quadrat in each month (n = 36), and the species of crops damaged was quantified. Economic loss was estimated by multiplying the quantity of crops damaged within the quadrat, with the market value of crops which was collected from the Farm Information Bureau, Kerala. Ten species of wild animals damaged 11 species of crops in the District. Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) did the highest damage, and the economic loss was estimated as Rs.17,35,625/- per annum, followed by wild pig (Sus scrofa) (Rs. 3736/- per ha/annum) and Indian crested porcupine (Hystrix indica) (Rs. 615.47/- per ha/annum). Feeding on tender coconuts (Cocos nucifera) by Indian giant squirrel (Ratufa indica) was reported for the first time, and this feeding behaviour was reported from three Forest Ranges adjacent to the wildlife sanctuaries. Mean loss was Rs. 2247/- per annum. Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus) and other birds contributed to high economic loss in the paddy fields (Oryza sativa) near Chulanur Peafowl Sanctuary, Kerala, and the loss was Rs. 16,615.45/- per ha. The study indicated that crop damage by animals is causing severe economic loss to farmers in the District, and mitigation measures, namely, solar electric fence, chilli-rope fence, yellow-coloured plastic sheet fence and fishnet fence, are suggested.


Crop damage Human-wildlife conflict Kerala Thrissur India 



We are thankful to the Director, Dr. K.V. Sankaran (Retd.), Kerala Forest Research Institute, for providing necessary facilities for the study. Forest officials of Thrissur District and farmers in the fringe areas of the forest gave all co-operation needed for the study.


  1. Ali R, Mahdi F, Khan MF (2003) Estimation of rodent damage on coconut plantations and sugarcane in Sindh. Pak J Biol Sci 6:1051–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alkon PU, Saltz D (1985) Patterns of Indian crested porcupine (Hystrix indica) damage to cultivate potatoes. Agric Ecosys Environ 14:171–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cai J, Jiang Z, Zeng Y, Li C, Bravery BD (2008) Factors affecting crop damage by wild boar and methods of mitigation in a giant panda reserve. Eur J Wildl Res 54:723–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chakravarthy AK, Girish AC, Sridhara S (2006) Pest status of the Indian crested porcupine, Hystrix indica. In: Sridhara S (ed) Vertebrate pests in agriculture: the Indian scenario, Jodhur Publishers, India, pp 287–300Google Scholar
  5. Chauhan NPS, Barwal KS, Kumar D (2009) Human-wild pig conflict in selected states in India and mitigation strategies. Acta Silv Lignaria Hung 5:189–197Google Scholar
  6. Chelliah K, Kannan G, Kundu S, Abilash N, Madhusudan A, Baskaran N, Sukumar R (2010) Testing the efficacy of chilli-tobacco rope fence as a deterrent against crop raiding elephants. Curr Sci 99:1239–1243Google Scholar
  7. Conover MR (2002) Resolving human-wildlife conflicts: the science of wildlife management. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton 418 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Dublin HT, Hoare RE (2004) Searching for solutions: the evolution of an integrated approach to understanding and mitigating human–elephant conflict in Africa. Hum Dimens Wildl 9:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gill RMA (1992) A review of damage by mammals in north temperate forests. Oxf J For 65:145–169Google Scholar
  10. Govind SK, Jayson EA (2013) Efficiency of chilli powder (Capsicum sp.) to deter wild elephants from the crop fields in a tropical area. Millenn Zool 14:21–24Google Scholar
  11. Hafeez S, Ashfaq M, Khan GS, Khan ZH (2012) Damage inflicted by the Indian crested porcupine, Hystrix indica on forestry and agricultural systems in Punjab, Pakistan. J Asian Afr Stud 47:168–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heberlein TA (2004) ‘Fire in the Sistine chapel’: how Wisconsin responded to chronic wasting disease. Hum Dimens Wildl 9:165–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hill CM (2004) Farmers’ perspectives of conflict at the wildlife–agriculture boundary: some lessons learned from African subsistence farmers. Hum Dimens Wildl 9:279–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jayson EA (1999) Studies on crop damage by wild animals in Kerala and evaluation of control measures. KFRI Research Report 169. Kerala Forest Research Institute, PeechiGoogle Scholar
  15. Karanth KK, Gopalaswamy AM, Defries R, Ballal N (2012) Assessing patterns of human-wildlife conflicts and compensation around a central Indian protected area. PLoS One 7:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Madden F (2004) Creating co-existence between humans and wildlife: global perspectives on local efforts to address human–wildlife conflict. Hum Dimens Wildl 9:247–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Manfredo MJ, Zinn HC, Sikorowski L, Jones J (1998) Public acceptance of mountain lion management: a case study of Denver, Colorado, and nearby foothill areas. Wildl Soc Bull 26:964–970Google Scholar
  18. Marker LL, Mills MGL, Macdonald DW (2003) Factors influencing perceptions of conflict and tolerance toward cheetahs on Namibian farmlands. Conserv Biol 17:1290–1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Naughton-Treves L, Grossberg R, Treves A (2003) Paying for tolerance: the impact of livestock depredation and compensation payments on rural citizen’s attitudes towards wolves. Conserv Biol 17:1500–1511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nyhus PJ, Fischer H, Madden F, Osofsky S (2003) Taking the bite out of wildlife damage: the challenges of wildlife compensation schemes. Conser Pract 4:37–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ogra M, Badola R (2008) Compensating human-wildlife conflict in protected area communities: ground level perceptions from Uttarakhand, India. Hum Ecol 36:717–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pradhan V, Dar MA, Rather MM, Panwar M, Pala NA (2012) Human-wildlife conflict in Kitam bird sanctuary: perceptions and possible solutions. Indian Forester 138:915–920Google Scholar
  23. Prater SH (1965) The book of Indian animals. 2nd rev edn. Bombay Natural History Society, Bombay, 324 pGoogle Scholar
  24. Roy PB, Sah R (2012) Economic loss analysis of crops yield due to elephant raiding: a case study of Buxa Tiger Reserve (west) West Bengal, India. J Econ Sustain Dev 3:83–88Google Scholar
  25. Schley L, Roper TJ (2003) Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa in Western Europe, with particular reference to consumption of agricultural crops. Mammal Rev 33:43–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sillero-Zubiri C, Sukumar R, Treves A (2007) Living with wildlife: the roots of conflict and the solutions. In: Key topics in conservation biology (Eds. D.W. MacDonald and K. Service), pp. 253–270. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, MaldenGoogle Scholar
  27. Srivastava DC (2000) Porcupine damage in sugarcane. Pest Manag Econ Zool 8:185–187Google Scholar
  28. Sukumar R (1985) Ecology of the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) and its interaction with man in South India, PhD thesis, Vol.1&2. Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  29. Thyagaraj NE, Chakravarthy AK, Girish AC (2006) Feeding behavior of porcupine Hystrix indica Kerr in coconut plantations of Western Ghats of Karnataka. In: Advances in Indian entomology: productivity and health, vol 2, pp 169–176Google Scholar
  30. Veeramani A, Jayson EA (1995) A survey of crop damage by wild animals in Kerala. Indian Forester 121:949–953Google Scholar
  31. Wang SW, Curtis PD, Lassoie JP (2006) Farmers perceptions of crop damage by wildlife in Jigme Singye Wangchuck National park, Bhutan. Wildl Soc Bull 34:359–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Webb SL, Gee KL, Strickland BK, DeYoung RW (2009) Efficacy of a 15-strand high tensile electric fence to control white-tailed deer movements. Wildl Biol Pract 5:45–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wilson CJ, Britton AM, Symes RG (2009) An assessment of agriculture damage caused by red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) and fallow deer (Dama dama L.) in Southwest England. Wildl Biol Pract 5:104–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wildlife DepartmentKerala Forest Research InstituteThrissurIndia

Personalised recommendations