Conservationists must work by uniting people to promote conservation. Science cannot be their only tool for this. They must understand human empathy, ethics, and morals, and use them to approach conservation goals. We need a midway approach – where science must be used to find “humane” solutions to issues that affect our wildlife.
In all my years as a conservation storyteller, I have had the opportunity to interact with many top professionals in the field of conservation. I have also listened to their opinions about how conservation must be done. From my conversations with them, I found that a large section of conservationists believe that conservation should be left to the professionals and that ‘science‘ should dictate every action. In their opinion, the ‘ordinary‘ person should learn to accept the decisions based on scientific facts and figures and abide by them. However, can conservation goals be achieved through science alone, or does their success also require the integration of ethical and moral values into conservation practices?
In my opinion, we certainly cannot deny that science plays a crucial role in guiding our strategies to achieve successful conservation. At the same time, we cannot forget that conservation involves animals and humans—living beings capable of breathing, feeling, and experiencing a range of emotions. In conserving this system of life, we cannot overlook the very qualities that define life.
I believe that science-based conservation strategies alone will not work unless we integrate human values and emotions into conservation practices. We must not forget that modern science and technology have brought us to this precipice, and decades of preaching “traditional conservation science” have not been very effective in reversing the crisis. This is because professionals have forgotten the most important thing – the role of ethics, morality, and emotions in conservation. Successful conservation depends on invoking the human will to protect the planet and using science as one of the tools to design solutions. Moreover, a small community of conservationists is not enough to achieve conservation goals. Mass involvement is needed.
Also Read: Illegal Wildlife Trade Is Silently Killing Lesser-Known Species In India
In India, we are fortunate to belong to a culture that fosters a strong, deep connection with other beings with whom we share our planet. Unlike in Western culture, where wildlife is often “commodified,” in India, animals are mostly revered and often worshipped. Hence, in India, tigers, lions, and leopards are seen roaming near human-dominated areas, while in the United Kingdom, even the protected areas lack apex predators like wolves, bears, and lynxes that once thrived there.
The Indian culture of inclusion has helped save our wildlife through the millennia. In a country with over 1.4 billion people, it is almost impossible to protect wildlife if people are not ready to live with them. Our protected areas, where human activities are restricted by law, encompass roughly 5% of India’s area, and are insufficient to achieve India’s conservation goals. Expanding such areas is also difficult, given the space needs of our growing population. At such a time, it is people’s “compassion” for the natural world that must be harnessed to protect wildlife in the non-protected areas.
Also Read: Local Communities Key To India’s Wildlife Conservation
We must remember that stark scientific facts cannot always drive people to take action. If that were so, actors creating a fantasy world for them on-screen would not become their to-die-for heroes. Touching people’s hearts is just as important as triggering their minds to drive them to take action for conservation.
Hence, conservationists must be very careful about how they propagate conservation and the language they use. For example, some top Indian conservationists have thoughtlessly called for the mass culling of feral dogs to resolve the issue of these dogs attacking and killing wild animals, as well as the risk of spreading fatal rabies among people and wildlife. Some of them also treat dog lovers and feeders in a very derogatory way, blaming them for increasing the dog population. However, in doing so, they are only creating more hurdles for the wildlife they aim to protect.
Firstly, they must understand that compassion cannot be selective – when they are pushing people to eliminate dogs due to the risks they pose, people will apply it to any such animal, which will also mean mayhem for our wildlife. When people do not want to live with dogs that can cause diseases, they will also not accept the presence of tigers, lions, and leopards, as these animals can attack them or their livestock. We know that one-third of our tiger population lives outside protected areas. What will happen to them when people want to eliminate these animals as well?
Also, treating animal lovers or welfare activists with disdain isolates a large section of the people from conservationists at a time when every person’s involvement is needed to make conservation work. A section of people who could become conservation’s most incredible supporters because they already have a compassionate heart will be alienated because of the unsympathetic handling of the issue by the conservationists.
Conservationists must work by uniting people to promote conservation. Science cannot be their only tool for this. They must understand human empathy, ethics, and morals, and use them to approach conservation goals. We need a midway approach – where science must be used to find “humane” solutions to issues that affect our wildlife. For example, in the case of feral dogs, a rigorous vaccination/sterilisation programme can be mobilised with the aid of local dog lovers/feeders, and long-term monitoring of the program’s success can be conducted with their help. The deficiencies can be noted and improved upon. It is all about getting together and using each other’s strengths to achieve conservation goals.
We must understand that, like everything else, conservation in India must be done the Indian way. We cannot simply copy and paste Western conservation principles into our country. It would go against our people’s core ethos and morals and only lead to chaos and confusion in their hearts and minds. While the term “compassionate conservation” has come into use now in the modern scientific world and is gradually growing in popularity, our culture has been propagating the same for a long time. It is a conservation practice that rejects conservation principles guided by anthropocentrism, human supremacy, and narrow utilitarianism but accepts the inclusion of ethical and moral values to guide conservation decisions. The intrinsic value of each life form is taken into account while designing conservation strategies. Although a relatively new concept in the modern world, our culture has always respected the inherent value of each life form and preached a culture of peaceful co-existence with other beings with whom we share the planet.
In the coming times, India’s conservation scenario will become more complicated. With the dilution of Indian culture, the growing influence of Western culture and globalization, the rise in consumerism, and rapid urbanization and unplanned development, conserving India’s ecosystems will be a major challenge. Climate change, a globally created phenomenon, will also wreak havoc on the lives of the country’s large and vulnerable population. Standing at the brink of catastrophic consequences, a major pro-conservation movement involving the people at large may be the only answer to the crisis we face today. Such a movement can only be triggered when human values, morals, and ethics are harnessed to involve them in conservation practices and decisions.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author solely. TheRise.co.in neither endorses nor is responsible for them. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.