WII Digital Repository
Established in 1982, Wildlife Institute of India (WII) is an internationally acclaimed Institution, which offers training program, academic courses and advisory in wildlife research and management. The Institute is actively engaged in research across the breadth of the country on biodiversity related issues.
The Institute's idyllic campus that has been carefully developed to create state of the art infrastructure encourages scholarly work.
This Repository is the digital asset management system which integrates the intellectual output in the form of research articles, Theses and other scanned documents. This Repository facilitates the share and exchange of intellectual output of the institute.
Communities in DSpace
Select a community to browse its collections.
Recent Submissions
Relocation as a conservation tool : a study of Sariska Tiger Reserve, Rajasthan
(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2026) Gupta, Rajesh Kumar; Mathur, V.B.
The present study is focused on the Voluntary Relocation of villages from Sariska Tiger Reserve. It all re-started in 2006 after the Sariska debacle, when Sariska Tiger Reserve lost all its tigers by 2005, due to poaching. The Central Government and the State Government, constituted two separate Task Forces, which submitted the Reports with numerous corrective measures to be undertaken in management of tiger reserves by, Project Tiger (now National Tiger Conservation Authority). The Tiger Task Force, commissioned by the Government of India, in its Report "Joining the Dots" called for priority to be given to resettlement of villages from core areas of tiger reserves for the long-term survival of the species. One of the prominent recommendations of both the Committees, was Relocation of villages, which ' was emphatically depicted and there was almost unanimous agreement that co-existence in core areas of tiger reserves was not congenial or feasible for breeding popUlation of ' tigers. Simultaneously, resurrection efforts were initiated in Sariska Tiger Reserve, to repopulate the western-most limit of tiger population, by reintroducing tigers from Ranthambhore. But among the other prerequisites, the most important one was to relocate four villages from the Core Area of the Tiger Reserve. Consequently, the process of relocation was restarted after a failed attempt in 1976 (Kiraska was relocated to Sirawas but returned back) with the Relocation Package of Rajasthan 2002 and old Project Tiger Relocation amount of 1 lakh per family. The first village selected was Bhagani, comprising of 21 families, was relocated to Bardod Rund (90 kms away from Sariska) in Alwar District near Behror. Till 2025, 5 complete villages and 6 partial villages, consisting of 1041 families out of 1471, have been relocated· to different places under Option I (Cash Package) & Option II (Land Package). The objective of the study was broadly to ascertain the impacts of relocation on the relocated families, analyse the quality-of-life indicators other than the economic indicators, evaluate the ' efficacy of. the Sariska Relocation Model vis a vis other relocation models of important Tiger Reserves in India and based on it, formulate/recommend a Rehabilitation package for assisting the Government of Rajasthan, to meet its stated policy objectives. Through Questionnaire survey, focused interviews, informal discussions, the study was done in all the 5 sites where families of 11 villages have been resettled under the Option.II (Land package) and also other locations, where families were relocated under the Option I (Cash Package). 108 families were surveyed [44 families (41 %) selected from Option I, 49 families (45%) from Option II and 15 (14%)] families from Hybrid. Families have been selected in'
random, without any bias. In order to ensure a confidence level of more than 90% and margin of error less than 10%, a total of more than 100 families needed to be selected as sample. The target of 10.4 % families has been carried out to get statistically relevant data for analysis and inferences. Satisfaction scores were found to be highest in the Hybrid package (8.47/1 0) compared to Cash (7.68/1 0) and Land (7.63/1 0) packages. Among the 5 relocated sites Bardod Rund indicated highest satisfaction levels, the results also signified the significance of the quality of land, especially with respect to water availability and soil 10 I P a ~ IJ quality, for overall happiness of the relocated families. Based on the mean satisfaction scores across villages, the ANOV A results indicated a ' statistically significant difference among villages (p = 0.001). As predicted, the livestock population of the villagers, pre and post relocation had reduced due to shifting from pastoralist economy to agrarian economy. The data revealed 40.7% of the families owned cattle numbers in the range of 50-100/family and 38.9% owned 25-50 cattle/family in the pre relocation phase. In the Post-relocation phase, this number has drastically reduced to zero in the range of 50-100 cattle /family. 92'.6% families own very less number of cattle in the range of 1-25 cattle/family. The income also saw increase in the relocated families. The average income per family in the Hybrid families (Rs.5.25 lakhs/family) is highest compared to Option I (Rs.3.99 lakhs/family) and Option II (Rs.4.l1 lakhs/family) packages. Chi-square analysis revealed a statistically significant change in the distribution of household income following relocation (p =0.000021). The income surge shows a 105% increase in hybrid families, 33.4% in Option I families and 51.1 % in Option II families. Decline in Milk Products and Livestock Sale as livelihood generators, whereas increase in labor and agriculture, was observed. Income category shifting observed from Rs. 0-3 lakhs and Rs. 3-6 lakhs, 'in pre-relocated villagers to higher income group, indicating economic prosperity. Cemea's (2002) Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction Model for Resettling Displaced Populations was also compared to test the relocation model adopted in Sariska and the eight impoverishment risks, proposed by Cernea, was also
assessed for the relocated families in Sariska. Almost all the risks were found to be (: very less/negligible, as per the analysis based on the data. As far as the quality of life-indicators were assessed, it clear that the psychological well-being of the relocated families were found satisfactory with 57 (53%) families expressing happiness more than the pre-relocation phase. 42 (39%) families opined happiness same as the pre-relocation phase and 9 (8%) families exhibited less happiness in the post-relocation phase. Across the packages, Hybrid packages shows highest level of happiness (80%), closely followed by Cash and land packages. 18% of the land package families, show less happiness than before. Level of stress assessed in the families through the questionnaire revealed that stress level remained the same in-25 families and reduced in 74 families. In some families, stress level was more than before. The Questionnaire survey indicates that more than 96% of the families are satisfied with the health facilities, provide/available in the relocated sites. 95% of the families are satisfied with the present standard of living. 68% families expressed high satisfaction on the education facilities compare to Sariska and more than 86.11 %_ families are provided with electricity compared to 91.6 % families who were deprived of electricity. The Sariska Village Relocation Model was compared to the best Relocation Model in the country (Satpura Tiger Reserve) apart from Maharashtra and Buxa in West Bengal. The importance of additional funding support from the . State Governments, was emphasised in the study. The Sariska relocation commenced from - 2007, which has been the case for relocation in all tiger reserves mainly because of the recommendation of the Tiger Task Force Report in 2005 post - Sariska crisis, that finally paved 'way for paradigm shift in focus towards village relocation and issuance of revised relocation package by NTCA. In the same span of 17 to 18 years different areas have performed differently. The pace of relocation in Satpura has been particularly exemplary. Around 50 villages have been relocated in the last 17 years whereas, 5 villages in Sariska, 8 in Ranthambore, 19 in Melghat, 2 in Buxa and 5 villages in T A TR, have been completely relocated. Where Satpura has been completely freed of human habitations in the CTH, T A TR has also created inviolate spaces by relocation of 5 out of 6 villages. Sariska on the other hand, is .still facing a challenging task of relocation and has been able to relocate 5 completely and 6 partial villages out of 29 villages. A comparison of the Relocation done in some of the Sates were done and it was found that the valuation of land in Option I (Cash package) families in Maharashtra is better, with handholding and grievance redressal mechanism in Satpura as the best. The involvement of CSR funds in relocation in Satpura was found worth emulating in Sariska. West Bengal's initiative in Buxa tiger reserve to provide additional land (homestead land for homestay) to Cash package families was found as a good liberal initiative for successful livelihood security options for the relocated families. The relocation policies of Rajasthan, NTCA and some other states were analysed. In Rajasthan 1.6 hectares of unirrigated land or 0.8 hectares of irrigated land is provided to landless villagers along with compensation of own land, and other structures Rs.15 lakh per family . For option I families, only an amount of Rs.15 lakhs, is provided to the families with no additional compensation for land surrendered. In the National Capital Region of Alwar, the land cost being exceedingly high, the trend of Cash options has reduced drastically and families are demanding Option II (Land Package) only for obvious reasons. The trend has reversed completely over a period of 15 years. The challenges in relocated families, were identified and recommendations were listed for future improvement of the Relocation package, including identification of isolated forest blocks for diversion under Forest Conservation Act, 1980, providing land rights at faster pace and convergence of schemes of different departments in an institutionalized way involving the District Administration. Handholding option of the families, especially the Cash package families was also proposed. At the end, the advantages of relocation of villages in creating 'inviolate space' for tigers was ascertained. It was clearly visible that tigers have selected the core natal areas in relocated village areas and tiger-cubs birth data indicated that that tiger occupancy and breeding has improved magically in area where village been relocated completely compared to partially relocated villages or non-relocated areas. In comparison, villages with lower relocation progress have shown comparatively less tiger use and no breeding records. The Pearson correlation value (r = 0.67) shows a positive relationship between relocation and tiger breeding success, while the Spearman correlation value (p = 0.69) also supports the same trend.
WII e-newsletter Spring
(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2026) Kolipakam, Vishnupriya; Kaur, Amarjeet; Gautam, Ritesh Kumar
WII e-Newletter (summer)
(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2026) Kolipakam, Vishnupriya; Kaur, Amarjeet; Gautam, Ritesh Kumar
Role of social and ecological attributes in human-large mammal interaction: multi-species approach in Tamilnadu, India
(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2026) David, Milda; Ramesh, T.
Escalating anthropogenic pressure and ensuing human-large mammal conflict (HLMC) incidents jeopardize the wildlife conservation goals as well as security of human life and livelihoods. It results in loss of human life and livestock, damage to crop and property, leading to negative perceptions among the local communities, and further retaliatory killing of conflict animals. Evidentially, large mammal populations are declining at a faster pace majorly due to anthropogenic pressures such as habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching, and retaliatory killing. The interface area, where the forest give way to the agricultural matrix and human settlements, is where the human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is most frequent, consequential and complex. These edge habitats act as a demographic sink, especially for wide-ranging species, having mortality rates and extinction risk within and beyond the forest reserve boundaries often
higher than inside core PAs (Woodroffe and Ginsberg, 1998). It is crucial to ascertain the intensity of conflict and its ecological and anthropogenic determinants at these interface areas to develop appropriate mitigation measures to conserve the populations of large mammals, secure human life and promote co-existence in the shared landscapes. The major objectives of the study are to (a) assess socio-ecological characteristics of HLMC across the management
gradients, (b) identify disparities in resource allocation between Protected Areas (PAs) and outside PAs and its effect on HWC, and (c) determine the effect of anthropogenic pressure on the distributional patterns of large mammals. My study species include tiger (Panthera tigris), leopard (Panthera pardus), dhole (Cuon alpinus), Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) and gaur (Bos gaurus), that contributes to a major share of HWC incidents in Tamil Nadu. A multispecies
study in such large and contiguous landscape of conservation importance can bring out the actual pattern of HLMC in the State and help policy-makers to develop effective mitigation measures. Towards the first objective, I used a systematic grid-based (5x5 km) sampling framework (n=485), across an area of 14,200 km2 encompassing sixteen Forest Divisions (FD), covering PAs, Outside PAs and its Fringe Areas (FAs) of Western and Eastern Ghats part of Tamil Nadu WEGPTN), India, namely, Kanyakumari Wildlife Sanctuary (WLS), Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (KMTR), Nellai WLS, Srivilliputhur Grizzled Squirrel Sanctuary, Megamalai WLS, Coimbatore FD, Kodaikanal WLS, Theni FD, Nilgiri FD, Gudalur FD, Mudumalai Tiger Reserve (MTR), Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve (STR), Erode FD, Dharmapuri FD, Cauvery North WLS (CNWLS) and Hosur FD. The data was collected between November 2017 and
March 2020 based on conflict incidents from tiger, leopard, dhole, elephant, and gaur for the past five years, through semi-structured interviews (n=1460) of local communities. I identified the local people’s perception towards coexistence and the socio-economic factors driving them. I observed that 90% (n=1248) of the surveyed population had a negative perception towards coexisting with wildlife, while 7% (n=103) expressed a positive perspective, and 3% (n=38) maintained an indifferent stance. Notably, 79% (n=1091) of the sampled population resided within Fringe Areas (FAs), 13% (n=178) in Protected Areas (PAs), and 9% (n=120) in Reserved Forests (RFs). Among them, 90% (n=160) of the population from PA had negative, 9% (n=16) had positive and 1% (n=2) had indifferent attitude towards coexisting with wildlife; In RFs, 73% (n=88) and 27% (n=32) had negative and positive view towards coexisting with wildlife, respectively. Whereas, in FAs, 92% (n=1000), 5% (n=55) and 3% (n=36) had negative, positive, and indifferent view towards coexisting with wildlife, respectively. Top multinomial regression models discerned the most influential variables
determining the perception of local communities regarding coexistence with wildlife. These models elucidated that people’s perception of coexisting with wildlife, especially large mammals, was negatively influenced by decreased availability of basic amenities, lack of conductance of awareness program, an increased perception of the rise in HLMC incidents, increased prevalence of disease in livestock, increased negative view on Forest Department, increased fear of wildlife, decreased intensity of livestock depredation and increased crop depredation. Forty eight percent (n=694) of households reported having experienced human-carnivore conflict in the form of livestock depredations. Most of the livestock were killed by large carnivores in the mornings up until mid-day, between 6 am and 12 pm, coinciding with livestock grazing time inside the forest. Only a fewer tiger and leopard attacks occurred during the nights, followed by evening; the attacks were minimum during afternoon hours. Dhole attacks peaked in the early mid-evening hours and afternoon; no incidences of livestock predation by dholes occurred during night. Using the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) approach, the importance of potential predictor variables of HLMC was examined. Livestock predation risk by the tiger, leopard and dhole were found to be driven by the size of livestock species, dependency of local people on the forest, topography, proximity to the water body and forest boundary, precipitation, and forest cover. The probability of livestock depredation by tiger increased with a higher relative abundance of cow/buffalo, higher dependence of people
on forests, greater proximity to water sources, shorter distance to forest boundaries, relatively 3 higher elevations and villages located within the forest areas, particularly in core areas of PAs; Livestock depredation risk probability from leopard increased with relatively higher abundance of goat/sheep, domestic dog, higher dependence on the forest by households and an increase in topographical slope. The probability of livestock depredation by dhole increased with higher forest cover loss, increase in the relative abundance of goat/sheep, greater dependence on the forest by households, and relatively lower precipitation. The risk of predation from leopard and dhole exhibited high spatial overlap, and predation by leopards was higher than dhole and tiger. Livestock predation by leopard and dhole was frequent in open areas of RF and buffer zones, while that from tiger occurred in densely forested core regions of PAs. Forty five percent
(n=660) and ten percent (n=140) of households surveyed reported experiencing elephant and gaur conflict, respectively. Of these, both elephant and gaur are largely involved in crop damage, followed by property damage, human injury/death. Unlike large carnivores, most of the conflict incidents by elephant and gaur peaked in the night, followed by morning, evening and afternoon. Using GLM, I found that the major variables that influenced elephant and gaur
conflict with man were: percentage of crop cover, distance to the water source, the number of major crops grown, the number of minor crops grown, mean annual precipitation and mean slope. The probability of human-elephant conflict increased with increased crop cover, increase in distance to the water source, number of major and minor crops grown, while the conflict decreased with an increase in mean annual precipitation and mean slope. The risk of humangaur
conflict increased with lower percentage of crop cover, increase in distance to the water source, number of major crops grown, increase in mean annual precipitation and mean slope. I found that households inside RFs to report elephant conflict the most, followed by PAs and FAs. The reported gaur conflict was more in FAs, followed by RFs and PAs. I identified ca. 175 km2, 420km2, 430km2, 8900 km2, 625 km2 of the total sampled area, prone to tiger, leopard,
dhole, elephant and gaur conflict with man, respectively. I conducted a semi-structured questionnaire survey with the Forest Range Officers (FROs) of all sixteen FDs across the WEGPTN, between November 2018 and March 2020, to address the second objective. I investigated the patterns of human-wildlife interactions, employed mitigation measures and their effectiveness, poaching incidents, and availability of manpower and resources. The study highlighted the disparity in resource allocation among PAs and outside PAs though the intensity of conservation issues was similar. Over 50% of the FROs reported an increase in human-wildlife conflict incidents during the past five years. Major
species involved in the conflict in PAs and outside PAs were elephant, wild pig (Sus scrofa), 4 leopard, bonnet macaque (Macaca radiata), followed by sloth bear (Melursus ursinus), sambar (Rusa unicolor) (more in PAs), gaur (more in outside PAs), dhole, chital (Axis axis), and tiger. There were no variations in the mitigation measures employed in PAs and outside PAs. The endangered species, namely tiger (only in PAs), leopard, elephant, and pangolin (Manis
crassicaudata) were amongst the fourteen wildlife species poached in the PAs and outside PAs, although wild pig, sambar, black-naped hare (Lepus nigricollis), and chital dominated the list. Prevalent methods for poaching were snares, trained dogs, guns (dominant in PAs), followed by hand-made bombs, poisoning, cage traps, electric traps (only outside PAs), and food baits. Fund availability, anti-poaching camps and anti-poaching watchers were insufficient in outside
PAs. Over 50% of the FROs reported a decrease in poaching incidences in the past five years with improved wildlife management strategies. Based on the information gathered, I chose nine high-conflict zones, covering PAs and outside
PAs across the WEGPTN (MTR, STR, CNWLS, Gudalur FD, Nilgiris FD, Coimbatore FD, Erode FD, Dharmapuri FD and Hosur FD) and conducted ecological sign survey and vegetation survey between May 2019 and March 2021 to ascertain the occupancy of large mammals and quantify degree of human disturbances inside the forests. Considering the average home range size of the dominant large mammal species, 10x10 km sampling grids were laid across the
entire study area. I used a systematic grid-based Markovian model occupancy framework to identify the impact of ecological and anthropogenic variables (prey abundance, habitat features, direct human disturbance and habitat patchiness) on large mammal occupancy and mapped the Least Cost Pathway (LCP) and assess the Cost-Weighted Distance (CWD) analysis at a 100km2 scale. I found that tiger and dhole occupancy was driven by the abundance of large and
medium-sized prey. However, leopards relied on the available small prey species and utilised perforated forest patches surrounding PAs. Broadly, large mammal occupancy was more in the contiguous forests with ample water sources and decreased in habitats with increased human disturbances and habitat patchiness. I found that tiger occupancy was highly confined to the contiguous forests of PAs while the rest of the large mammal species had scattered but
concentrated occupancy in PAs. All the study species exhibited least habitat selection and permeability around highly fragmented landscapes, located farther from PAs. Accordingly, as the distance from PAs increased, the CWD also increased. I identified 87, 67, 78, 77 and 81 actively used LCPs respectively for tiger, leopard, dhole, elephant and gaur. There were 17, 41, 23, 26 and 23 optimized LCPs for tiger, leopard, dhole, elephant, and gaur, respectively.
Among the 17 optimized LCP for tiger, Euclidean distance value ranged from 22 to 86 km with CWD values between 25 and 150 km. From 41 optimized LCPs for leopard, the Euclidean (5) distance values ranged between 14 and 139 km, whereas, CWD values stretched between 34 and 1,928 km. The Euclidean distance values of dhole were between 22 and 106 km with a CWD value ranging from 24 and 512 km in the generated 23 optimized LCPs. For elephant,
there were 26 optimized LCPs, with Euclidean distance extending between 22 and 86 km; however, the CWD values ranged between 24 and 134 km. Among the 23 optimized LCPs for gaur, Euclidean distance value ranged from 22 and 78 km but the CWD value extended between 24 and 116 km. The LCP maps identified several pinch points for large mammal movement particularly outside PAs, including fragmented parts of Nilgiris, Gudalur, Coimbatore, and Dharmapuri FDs, highlighting critical regions for restoring core habitat connectivity. The substantial proportion of large mammals inhabiting outside PAs demands strong efforts for habitat restoration and minimising further habitat degradation, which can also reduce the risk of HLMC. HLMC are inevitable when natural landscapes undergo modifications. Bringing down the HLMC incidents to a tolerable limit through effective mitigation measures is the viable solution
to ensure harmonious existence of people and wildlife in a forest ecosystem. Findings underscore the importance of identifying factors affecting people’s perception towards coexistence, priority conflict hotspots, large mammal movement pathways, ecological and anthropogenic determinants of HLMC and large mammal occupancy, and the effectiveness of employed conflict mitigation measures. The conflict hotspot and corridor maps provide a powerful visual tool to understand patterns of HLMC and movement pattern of large mammals, respectively, at a landscape level to the stakeholders. The identified HLMC zones and the high resistance areas, regardless of PAs/outside PAs, should be provided with sufficient resources to mitigate conflict and landscape impermeability. Improved livestock husbandry practices, constructing predator-proof enclosures, and using shock-collars in high livestock depredation areas can be effective in decreasing the frequency of human-large carnivore conflict. Changing the cropping patterns, using a combination of elephant proof trench and electric fence, using early warning systems through Artificial Intelligence (AI) sensors, mobile technology and drones in the high conflict areas can reduce elephant and gaur conflict with humans. Providing timely compensation to the affected household is also an important mitigation measure to reduce the negative attitude of local communities. The study emphasises the need for forest habitat restoration by abating biotic pressure within the forest boundary, thereby enhancing prey abundance, availability of water resources, improved habitat connectivity to increase large mammal occupancy, reduce large mammal movement resistance within the forests, reduce HLMC and promote coexistence.
Landscape level patterns of mammalian assemblages in Bellary district, Karnataka
(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2025) Behera, Asit Kumar; Ramesh, T.
This study investigates the effect of habitat fragmentation on mammalian assemblages. Besides that, it also addresses how large predators can shape the behavioural patterns of prey and subordinate predators if diverse mammalian species need to be conserved. Such studies are urgently required in India, as landscape transformation is taking a toll at an alarmingly high rate in the name of development. Furthermore, fragmented Deccan landscapes provide a unique opportunity to examine how species interactions and behavioural adjustments facilitate coexistence under anthropogenic pressure, particularly within carnivore guilds where apex predators, mid-level carnivores, and prey species increasingly overlap with humans. Despite this, integrative assessments combining habitat use, community structure, fragmentation dynamics, and species interactions remain rare in peninsular India. By combining occupancy modelling, activity pattern analysis, community metrics, nestedness analysis, and multispecies interaction models, my study provides a comprehensive assessment of how mammals respond to human-modified landscapes. The findings offer critical insights for biodiversity conservation, landscape management, and coexistence strategies in multi-use ecosystems. The study aims to understand how landscape-level factors and interspecific interactions shape mammalian communities in a human-modified, fragmented and semi-arid ecosystem. By integrating data across anthropogenic land-use gradients, patch characteristics, and interspecies behavioural responses, this research provides a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms influencing mammalian persistence in fragmented landscapes. Specifically, the study examines how different land-use types, such as PAs, RFs, and adjoining Fringe Mosaic Farmlands (FMFLs), support varying levels of mammalian abundance, richness, diversity, community, and activity. It examines how anthropogenic and natural habitat variables determine the responses of mammals. It further investigates how forest patch attributes influence species assemblage, identifying which life-history traits make species more vulnerable to extinction. Beyond habitat features, the study explores species interactions, including spatial and temporal segregation among top carnivores, meso-carnivores, and prey species to understand coexistence strategies under anthropogenic pressure.