Answer

Introduction

Uttarakhand is experiencing a critical shift in human–wildlife conflict, where traditional tiger-centric narratives are being replaced by rising encounters with leopards and Asiatic black bears. This transition is driven by a conservation paradox where the success of one species inadvertently displaces others into human landscapes.

Body

Ecological Factors Behind the Trend

• Predator Displacement: The success of Project Tiger(1973) has led to increased tiger density in core forests, pushing the more adaptable leopards into fringe areas.
  Eg: Tiger populations in Corbett and Rajaji rose to over 560 by 2023, forcing leopards into human settlements.
• Climate Disruption: Warming temperatures have shortened hibernation periods for Asiatic black bears, making them active during winter months when they were traditionally dormant. 
• Habitat Fragmentation: Large-scale infrastructure projects like power lines and roads have carved through community forests, destroying natural wildlife corridors.
  Eg: In the period (1991-2021), 58,684 hectares of forest area were diverted in Uttarakhand, the fourth highest among all States
• Prey Depletion: Recurrent forest fires and invasive species have degraded the natural forage (like oak and berries), forcing bears to scavenge in orchards. 

Socio-Economic Factors Behind the Trend

• Abandoned Settlements: Mass out-migration has left thousands of “ghost villages” that have turned into dense thickets of invasive Lantana.
  Eg: Over five lakh people have migrated from the hills in a decade, leaving predator havens in deserted settlements.
• Waste Mismanagement: Improper disposal of household organic waste and garbage heaps around hill towns acts as an attractant for scavenging bears and leopards. 
• Livestock Vulnerability: The abundance of stray dogs and poorly secured livestock provides “easy prey” for leopards living on the forest-village interface.
  Eg: Nearly 79% of Uttarakhand’s leopard population is now estimated to live outside protected areas.
• Centralized Management: The alienation of traditional Van Panchayats from forest management has reduced the community’s role in maintaining fire lines and forest health.
  Eg: Bureaucratic centralization has progressively reduced the community control established by the 1931 Act.

Holistic Measures for Sustainable Coexistence

• Technological Intervention: Deploying sensor-based alert systems and radio-telemetry can provide early warnings to villagers about predator movements.
  Eg: The Uttarakhand government is deploying solar fencing and AI-based sensor alert systems across hotspots.
• Habitat Restoration: Prioritizing the revival of native broadleaf forests (Oak/Kafal) will help restore the natural food cycle for bears and wild prey. 
• Community Empowerment: Strengthening Van Panchayats and creating Rapid Response Teams (RRT) equipped with modern gear can bridge the trust gap. 
• Population Control: Implementing scientific sterilization programs for leopards and monkeys to manage their density in human-dominated landscapes.
  Eg: The state government recently announced the setting up of wildlife sterilization centers in all districts.

Conclusion

The Himalayan conflict crisis requires moving beyond “single-species fixation” toward an integrated landscape approach. By revitalizing hill economies to check migration and restoring ecological balance through data-driven coexistence, Uttarakhand can harmonize the needs of its resilient mountain communities with its iconic wildlife heritage.

DOWNLOAD PDF