Ministry of Environment,

Forest and Climate Change,

Government of India
Government of India

Guidelines for
Mitigating Human–Wild Pig Conflict
Taking a Harmonious-Coexistence Approach
 Ministry of Environment, Forest Ministry of Environment,
and Climate Change, Forest and Climate Change,
Government of India, 2023 Indira Paryavaran Bhavan,
Jor Bagh Road,
Material from this New Delhi - 110 003, INDIA
publication may be used Website: [Link]
for educational purposes
provided due credit is
given.

Acknowledgments
The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India gratefully acknowledges the
contributions of experts and field practitioners who developed the guidelines, with support from innumerable
contributors using a participatory approach in workshops and consultations organised under the Indo-German Project
on Human-Wildlife Conflict Mitigation in India.

The Ministry acknowledges the technical support extended by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in
the preparation and pilot testing of these guidelines.

The Ministry acknowledges the support provided by the Wildlife Institute of India and the state forest departments of
Karnataka, Uttarakhand and West Bengal for pilot implementation of the key elements of the guidelines during
2018-22 and for providing their valuable feedback for updating the drafts.

Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

ii
 Ministry of Environment,
Forest and Climate Change,
Government of India
Government of India

Guidelines for
Mitigating Human–Wild Pig Conflict
Taking a Harmonious-Coexistence Approach

iii
 Abbreviations

BMZ German Federal Ministry for Economic IUCN International Union for Conservation of
Cooperation and Development Nature
CWLW Chief Wildlife Warden JFM Joint Forest Management
CZA Central Zoo Authority MoEF&CC Ministry of Environment, Forest and
DBT Direct Benefit Transfer Climate Change, Government of India
DFO Divisional Forest Officer NDRF National Disaster Response Force
DLCC District-level Coordination Committee NGO Non-governmental organization
DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid NTCA National Tiger Conservation Authority
EIA Environmental impact assessment NTG National Technical Group
EWRR Early Warning and Rapid Response NWAP National Wildlife Action Plan
GIS Geographical information system OPs Operating procedures
GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale PA Protected area
Zusammenarbeit PCCF Principal Chief Conservator of Forest
GoI Government of India PPE Personal protective equipment
HOFF Head of Forest Force (in a state) PRT Primary Response Team
HWC Human–wildlife conflict RFID Radio frequency identification
HWC-MAP Human–Wildlife Conflict Management RRT Rapid Response Team
Action Plan SDRF State Disaster Response Force
HWC-NAP National Human–Wildlife Conflict Mitigation SFD State forest department
Strategy and Action Plan SHG Self-help group
HWPC Human-Wild Pig Conflict SLCC State-level Coordination Committee
HWC-SAP State-level HWC Mitigation Strategy and SOPs Standard operating procedures
Action Plan WII Wildlife Institute of India
IFS Indian Forest Service WLPA Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972

iv
Contents
Acknowledgments ii
Abbreviations iv
Contents v
1 About the Guidelines 6
1.1 The Overall Context 6
1.2 Purpose and Scope 6
1.3 Approach 6
1.4 Legal and policy framework for implementing the guidelines 6
1.5 Institutional framework for implementing the guidelines 6
2. Context and Situation 7
3. Addressing the Drivers and Pressures of HWPC 8
3.1 Zonation 8
3.2 Monitoring and managing habitat-related drivers and pressures 8
3.3 Measures to strengthen cross-sector cooperation to be institutionalised 9
3.4 Scientific management of Wild Pig population at interface areas 9
3.5 Sustainable garbage management around protected areas and at HWPC hotspots 10
3.6 Systematic research and monitoring addressing HWPC 10
3.7 Measures to strengthen the system of knowledge management in HWPC mitigation 11
4. Deploying Measures to Prevent Human–Wild Pig Conflicts 11
4.1 Mapping HWPC hotspots and monitoring the populations at hotspots 11
4.2 Support local communities in crop protection measures 12
4.3 Effective use of the rapid response teams and awareness measures 13
4.4 Scientific management of population at HWPC hotspots 13
4.5 Addressing zoonotic and other emerging diseases, adopting a one health approach 15
5. Addressing the Emergency Situations Arising due to HWPC 14
5.1 Establishment of emergency response mechanism 14
5.2 Intra- and inter-agency coordination and cooperation 14
5.3 Preparedness of response teams 14
5.4 Action at the onset of an emergency or specific situation 14
5.5 Key response actions during and after an emergency 14
6. Reducing the Impact of HWPC on the Health and Overall Well-being of Affected Humans 15
6.1 Addressing the situation of loss of human life 15
6.2 Addressing the situation of injury/loss of livestock 15
6.3 Addressing the situation of crop/property damage 15
7. Reducing the Impact of HWPC on the Health and Well-being of Affected Wild Pigs 16
7.1 Overall measures 16
7.2 Addressing the health and well-being of wild pigs during capture and translocation 16
8. Use of Learnings from the Guidelines to Further Strengthen Institutional and Policy Framework
Relating to HWPC Mitigation in India 17
9. Process of Development, Pilot-Testing of These Guidelines and the Consultation Process 17
10. Monitoring and Evaluation of Guidelines 17
Annexe 1 18
National Technical Group (NTG) 18
Working Group on Pilot Implementation of Guidelines and HWC-NAP 18
Author Group for drafting the guidelines 18

v
 1 ABOUT THE GUIDELINES
1.1 THE OVERALL CONTEXT 1.3 APPROACH
• These guidelines get their overall context from the Wild Life • The development and implementation of these guidelines is driven by
(Protection) Act, 1972 (WPA), the Advisory to Deal with Human– a harmonious-coexistence approach3 to ensure that both humans and
Wildlife Conflicts (HWC) (F. No. 8-60/2020 WL (Part-1)) (MoEF&CC Wild Pigs are protected from negative impacts of HWPC.
2021) and the National Human–Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Strategy, • The guidelines address the issue of HWPC, taking a holistic approach.
National Wildlife Action Plan (2017-35)1 and National Human- The holistic approach of the guidelines entails not only addressing
Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Strategy and Action Plan of India (2021– the emergency situations arising due to immediate conflict situations
26) (HWC-NAP)2. The HWC-NAP provides the overall conceptual but also addressing the drivers and pressures that lead to HWPC;
and institutional framework for implementing these guidelines. providing guidance on establishing and managing prevention
• These guidelines take into consideration the existing guidelines, methods; and reducing the impact of conflict on both humans and
advisories and good practices on human–Wild Pig conflict (HWPC) Wild Pigs.
mitigation issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and • The development of these guidelines and their intended implementation
Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and advisories and standard operating are driven by a participatory approach. These guidelines are intended
procedures (SOPs) issued by various state forest departments (SFDs) to facilitate participatory planning, development and implementation of
and builds on them to bring about a more holistic approach to HWPC HWPC mitigation measures with key sectors and stakeholders at the
mitigation. national, state and local levels.
• The following guidelines on cross-cutting issues are to provide • Efforts have been made to forge linkages with plans and guidelines of
guidance on selected issues: Guidelines for Cooperation between the key relevant sectors for enhancing synergies and eliminating trade-
Forest and Media sector in India: Towards effective communication on offs at the field level.
Human-Wildlife Conflict Mitigation; Occupational Health and Safety in
• Taking a capacity development approach, the guidelines facilitate
the Context of Human–Wildlife Conflict Mitigation; Crowd Management
the implementers through provision of Implementer’s Toolkit, which
in Human-Wildlife Conflict Related Situations; and Addressing Health
includes Operating Procedures (OPs), formats, checklists, and other
Emergencies and Potential Health Risks Arising Out of Human—
field implementation aids.
Wildlife Conflict Situations: Taking a One Health Approach..
• In addition to the HWPC mitigation guidelines, following guidelines 1.4 LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK
are to provide guidance on other selected species: guidelines for FOR IMPLEMENTING THE
mitigating human–Elephant, –Leopard, –Gaur, –Snake, –Crocodile,
–Macaque, –Blue Bull, –Bear and –Blackbuck conflicts.
GUIDELINES
• These guidelines should be read in conjunction with the existing
1.2. PURPOSE AND SCOPE relevant legal and regulatory frameworks, especially the Wildlife
• The guidelines aim to facilitate a common understanding among key (Protection) Act, 1972. The following legislations are considered
stakeholders on what constitutes effective and efficient mitigation of directly relevant for conservation when dealing with HWPC:
HWPC in India, leading to co-existence, and to ensure standardisation – Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
in performing mitigation operations in the most effective and efficient – Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960
manner, with minimum damage to humans and Wild Pigs. • Sections 9, 11(1)(a) (2) (3), 12(bb), 29, 35(6) and 39(1)(a) of the
• The guidelines provide advice on mitigation measures to be used to WLPA 1972 are especially relevant when dealing with HWPC.
address HWPC in the long term, as well as to facilitate the development, • Other important laws that facilitate conservation when dealing with
assessment, customisation and evaluation of site-specific HWPC HWPC include the Environment Protection Act, 1986; Indian Penal
mitigation measures that are effective and wildlife-friendly. Code, 1860; Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
• The guidelines serve as a basis for overall long-term planning and (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006; the Indian Forest Act, 1927;
coordination of HWPC mitigation measures at the national, state and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980; the Environment (Protection) Act,
division levels. 1986; and Disaster Management Act, 2005.
• In general, the guidelines apply to all stakeholders relevant to HWPC • The Supplementary Framework to HWC-NAP on Legislative Framework
mitigation and are not limited to state forest departments (SFDs). for HWC Mitigation in India4 may be referred to for more details on the
• The guidelines will be able to bring in more effectiveness and specific legal provisions for HWC mitigation.
efficiency when they are fully integrated into the division-level
HWC Management Action Plans (HWC-MAP) and state-level HWC
Mitigation Strategy and Action Plans (HWC-SAP).

1.5 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINES

• The institutional mechanism outlined in the HWC-NAP will be followed for implementing these guidelines.

1 MoEFCC (2017). National Wildlife Action Plan (2017-35)

2 National HWC Mitigation Strategy and Action Plan of India (2021–26), available from [Link]
[Link]
3 ‘Harmonious coexistence’ is defined as a dynamic but sustainable state in which humans and wildlife adapt to living in shared landscapes, with minimum
negative impacts of human–wildlife interactions on humans or on their resources and on wildlife or habitats. The mitigation measures designed using this
approach maintain a balance between the welfare of animals and humans in which the two are given equal importance. The overlap in space and resource use is
managed in a manner that minimises conflict.
4 Supplementary frameworks to the HWC-NAP: [Link]
[Link]

6
2. CONTEXT AND SITUATION
The Wild Pig (Sus scrofa) is a classical example of a multi- of habitats, allows its populations to survive and thrive in
speciality ecosystem engineer. It ploughs, disperses seeds, human-dominated landscapes. An increase in the number
forms an important prey base for large carnivores and plays and intensity of instances of Wild Pigs foraging on crops
an important role as a scavenger. No other species has is an indicator of an increasing local Wild Pig population.
this combination of specialisations. The presence of the With the availability of a variety of food resources, and
Wild Pig is an indication of the true functional value of an high fecundity rates, a Wild Pig population can multiply
ecosystem. The high rate of reproduction and widespread at a rapid rate. Food crops and waste dumps aid the
distribution of the Wild Pig helps maintain these functions growth of Wild Pig populations. Another reason for the
in the different types of ecosystem that it is found in. increase in Wild Pig populations in recent years is also
linked to declining or low populations of natural predators
The Wild Pig is one of the most abundant and widely and consequent increases in HWPC. Habitat loss and
distributed large-sized omnivorous ungulates. The Wild fragmentation are the major threats faced by the species.
Pig is categorised as a Least Concern species by the
IUCN Red List. In India, it is distributed everywhere Wild Pigs are among the most aggressive and persistent
except in the upper Himalaya and in the desert areas of crop foragers. Wild Pig populations close to agricultural
Gujarat and Rajasthan. Since the Wild Pig populations areas have become dependent on crops and agricultural
in most states within India have not been enumerated or produce. Human food waste also contributes to their
estimated regularly, there is very little information about increasing presence in forest-fringe areas. Humans also
the population or status of the species. get injured when they encounter Wild Pigs accidentally.
Isolated cases of Wild Pigs interacting negatively with
Human-Wild Pig conflict (HWPC) refers to the negative livestock and causing injuries, and in rare cases death of
interaction between humans and Wild Pigs, leading to livestock, have also been reported.
adverse impacts, such as injuries to humans, loss of
human lives, crops, livestock and other properties or even A key factor of HWPC may be the availability of only
impacts on the emotional well-being of humans and to the a limited number of effective mitigation measures.
equally negative impacts on Wild Pigs and/or their habitats. Therefore, the desired solution may involve a holistic
approach that addresses the drivers and pressures,
The Wild Pig’s highly adaptable nature, along with its along with effective preventive measures, while reducing
capacity to cope with landscape changes, and alterations the vulnerability of local communities and Wild Pigs.

7
 3. ADDRESSING THE DRIVERS AND PRESSURES OF
HWPC
A systematic analysis of HWPC mitigation measures may with the adjoining forests. They have become entirely
be carried out to assess their effectiveness and wildlife- dependent on agriculture fields and waste dumps. Here
friendliness in different types of conflict situation. This they are joined by feral pigs, and frequent interbreeding
will facilitate the customisation and adaption of mitigation is the norm. Scientific population management is most
measures/combining of two mitigation measures necessary urgently required at these locations.
to achieve the best possible impacts in the field.
3.2 MONITORING AND MANAGING
3.1 ZONATION HABITAT-RELATED DRIVERS AND
PRESSURES
Wild Pigs are often found frequenting agricultural lands
on the periphery of protected areas or forested areas. Habitats suitable for Wild Pigs are not uniformly distributed
Within a forest zone, Wild Pigs usually avoid interactions everywhere in a forest, as a result of which these animals
with humans. It is in the human-use areas and forest- are active foragers of the forest floor. Moreover, Wild Pig
village interface zone, i.e. forest fringes and agricultural resource preferences may vary from region to region.
settlements, that most of the HWPC cases are reported. Further, habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation are
some of the primary reasons why many wildlife species
The following zonation takes into consideration the
move out of natural habitats towards resource-rich human-
resources available and allows a science-based pragmatic
use areas when searching for food. There has been a
approach to landscape-level planning for conservation and
widespread loss of forests to the expansion of agriculture
HWPC mitigation.
and plantations and increasing human habitations. With
Zone 1 – Wild Pig habitat zone: This zone is in forested areas, such forest losses, the original Wild Pig habitats have also
and hence management interventions need to address and disappeared or have been fragmented.
prevent habitat fragmentation and degradation. Humans • Refuge areas inside villages, or nearby, support
venturing inside the forest may also encounter Wild Pigs, populations of both Wild Pigs and their hybrids.
leading to aggression by the animals. In fragmented and Thus, all Wild Pig habitats, whether within forests or
degraded forest areas, habitat improvement activities such refuge areas in villages, may be monitored regularly.
as reduction of biotic pressures and planting of native The existence of a Wild Pig refuge in a village forms a
(forage) plants and vegetation cover for Wild Pigs may source of HWPC. Thus, efforts may be made to reduce
be carried out so that their existing forest populations are or remove the Wild Pigs from such habitations.
sustained. Further, identification of areas used by sounders • In forested areas, critically important Wild Pig habitats
for foraging, resting, etc. needs to be completed and such as foraging areas, resting areas and scrub forests
activities that cause disturbances curtailed. may be monitored. Uncontrolled non-timber forest
produce (NTFP) collection may lead to degradation
Zone 2 – Village–forest interface: Most of the Wild Pig
of the forest habitats. All such collection may be
populations in this zone are involved in agricultural losses
monitored annually. The SFD may also collect data on
and injuries or losses sustained by livestock and humans.
the amounts/weights of different NTFP collected from
There is an active need to manage the Wild Pig population
different forest beats as these are good indicators of
in this zone. The SFD may work in close cooperation with
extraction levels.
local communities to achieve this as village panchayats are
active stakeholders here. Most of the mitigation measures, • Due to the dominance of invasive alien plant species
such as barriers, fencing and other preventive measures, (weeds) that out-compete native vegetation for space,
may be taken up in this zone. Long-term scientific there may be a reduction in the native palatable
management of Wild Pig population may also be planned woody shrub cover and suppression of native tree
for this zone. species. In time, with competition between humans
and Wild Pigs for forest resources, these changes
Zone 3 – Wild Pig exclusion zone: In this zone, Wild Pigs may result in increased HWPC. SFDs may map and
live in refuges within agricultural fields away from forests. monitor the invasive species cover and abundance in
These Wild Pigs have adapted well to humans and live in the landscape periodically and make further plans for
patches of wasteland, village forests or agricultural fields. invasive species removal accordingly.
These populations have almost lost their connection

8
• Unsustainable extraction of NTFPs, especially fruits and • Workshops, dialogues and training programmes for
nuts (natural food items of Wild Pigs), leads to a decrease the local community, especially members of the PRI
in the overall resource availability and particularly the institutions, may be organised at all HWPC hotspots to
ability of Wild Pigs to sustain themselves inside forested ensure that there is a common understanding of the
habitats. Overexploitation and unscientific harvesting of gravity of the situation when the option of scientific
NTFPs decrease the regeneration and productivity of population management is to be exercised.
natural forests. Apart from affecting the foraging habitat
of Wild Pigs and other wildlife, it also leads to a gradual 3.4 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT OF WILD
loss of livelihoods for forest-dwelling communities. The PIG POPULATION AT INTERFACE
primary objective of any management intervention may AREAS
be to bring about better livelihood opportunities and
reduce the dependence of humans on forest biomass. A local overabundance of wildlife, including Wild Pigs,
could be due to a reduction in the carrying capacity brought
3.3 MEASURES TO STRENGTHEN about by habitat loss and degradation and fragmentation
CROSS-SECTOR COOPERATION TO of natural habitats. It could also be due to a rapid growth
BE INSTITUTIONALISED in the population. Or it could be a combination of both. It
is therefore important to determine which factor is driving
Cross-sectoral cooperation for HWPC mitigation entails the overabundance so that the appropriate interventions
engagement of multiple stakeholders from different sectors can be selected.
and domains at the state level, at the landscape level
• Managing a local overabundance of Wild Pigs
and at the forest division/district level. Key stakeholders
requires good knowledge and data on population
of HWPC mitigation include the SFD, the Agriculture
size, dynamics, ranging of various sounders, habitat
Department and other institutions under the agriculture
variables, HWPC, etc.
sector, the district administration, the Animal Husbandry
Department, the Health Department, the Family Welfare • SFDs may work towards building both internal
Department, the Education Department, local schools capacity and collaborations with research institutes
and colleges, local hospitals, wildlife conservation and and researchers to achieve the high standards of data
development NGOs, farmers’ cooperatives and agricultural collection and analysis needed for scientific population
research and extension institutions. management. SFDs may adopt a robust population
monitoring protocol and implement it using trained
• State-level coordination committees (SLCC), a
field staff members or in collaboration with research
landscape-level multi-stakeholder forum and district-
institutes or local universities/colleges.
level coordination committees (DLCC) may be used
to strengthen the inter-agency coordination required • Naturally dispersing Wild Pig populations that have
for HWPC. A district-specific operational mechanism colonised new areas may be studied to assess if the
may be developed to address specific needs of HWPC knowledge obtained can translate into any viable
mitigation. solution or clues for scientific population management.
Past dispersal may be reviewed in terms of injuries or
• Safety audits5 focusing on crop protection measures
losses of human lives, crop or property damage and
may be conducted each year, if feasible, to ensure
other adverse impacts on the well-being of humans in
that all act responsibly and to facilitate inter-agency
and around the newly colonised sites, losses of Wild
cooperation.
Pig lives (including captures) and Wild Pig population
• Coordination between the forest and agriculture trends in terms of the management inputs and
sectors is important, and dedicated programmes at the challenges faced.
national, state and district levels may be formulated to
• Wild Pig populations occupying plantations or farms
implement these guidelines effectively.
may be translocated to a suitable area, where they can
be monitored closely by SFD staff members.

5 A safety audit is a process for pro-actively and periodically evaluating the mitigation measures in place at a site for their effectiveness and
wildlife-friendliness.

9
 3.5 SUSTAINABLE GARBAGE 3.6 SYSTEMATIC RESEARCH AND
MANAGEMENT AROUND PROTECTED MONITORING ADDRRESSING HWPC
AREAS AND AT HWPC HOTSPOTS
Data on the populations and distributions of Wild Pigs are
Food waste dumped close to forest edges is a major very scarce. Data are only available from a few isolated
attractant to many wild herbivore and omnivores species, protected areas, in the form of encounter rates or density
which are closely followed by the carnivores that prey on estimates. Thus, there is an urgent need to assess Wild Pig
these. The Wild Pig is one species that is attracted to these populations, particularly in areas close to conflict hotspots.
high-energy food resources. Food waste dumps support • Monitoring is essential to establish the trend in the Wild
very high numbers of Wild Pigs, which move into cultivated Pig population of an area. Apparent indirect signs of Wild
and non-cultivated areas of villages. Human-use areas Pig activity such as rooting, dung and hoof marks may be
lacking wild predators also support an unrestricted growth used to record the presence/relative abundance of Wild
of Wild Pig populations. Sustainable garbage management Pigs in an area. The various methods adopted for Wild
is thus an effective measure in controlling the populations Pig population monitoring include sign surveys, tracking
and movements of Wild Pigs within human-dominated plots, capture–recapture methods using camera traps
landscapes. and E-eye.
• Village panchayats on forest fringes may ensure that • Population monitoring of Wild Pigs may be conducted
garbage dumps are not located close to the forest mainly in agricultural and forest-fringe habitats.
edges and that there are ecologically sound garbage It will be useful to assess the populations at the
storage and disposal plans. Wild Pig access can be hotspots regularly, particularly before and after the
prevented by covering dumps and maintaining locked implementation of mitigation measures. In the future,
garbage dumps. such population estimation may be a major deciding
• When landfills are used for disposal, their designs may factor in allowing scientific population management of
not only be sanitary but secure too. Landfill designs overabundant Wild Pig populations.
may incorporate environmental planning to ensure • For effective long-term scientific population
wildlife protection. A landfill may be securely fenced to management, and identification and selection of
exclude animals. appropriate sounders within the conflict hotspot,
• Another environment-friendly way of reducing dumps information about their home range, habitat use and
would be to allow recycling of most of the material. ranging patterns is critical.
Packaging materials and plastics contribute immensely • For any assessment of a species (and populations) at
to the bulk of the waste. Improvements in packaging any (local/regional) scale, it is essential that baseline
materials and package disposal may be explored by the information be generated on the status and distribution
village panchayats and municipal councils. of the species and its interactions with various
• Some Wild Pigs have become habituated to foraging (human and non-human) communities. Camera-trap
within the boundaries of villages and towns in their search monitoring, not only in protected forests but also at
for garbage or waste dumps. ‘Aversion conditioning’ their interface with agricultural areas and even selected
may be tested to discourage this behaviour of Wild Pigs. vantage spots in agricultural fields, may provide a more
detailed and better estimate of the Wild Pig population
• The vegetable and food waste generated in weekly
and a better understanding of the behavioural ecology
markets and food waste and garbage thrown along roads
of the species.
and railway lines passing through forests all attract Wild
Pigs and other animals. SFDs may coordinate with the • Systematic monitoring is also needed at hotspots or
local administration for the overall organisation of such crop-foraging zones to study the intensity of conflict,
markets, waste management and disposal in such a crops affected (qualitative/quantitative), distance from
way that the waste generated does not attract Wild Pigs. forest/refuge, group size/composition of crop-foraging
Wild Pigs, etc. to assess conflict intensity levels at
• The importance of using public toilets may also be
various sites and prioritise sites for conflict mitigation.
included in the community awareness programmes
conducted for the villagers living close to the forests in • The current Wild Pig population densities at a hotspot,
order to minimise the risk to life. SFDs may coordinate the demographic structures of various populations and
with the local sanitation department to get toilets built general behaviour may be thoroughly quantified before
(under the Swachh Bharat Mission), including proper any scientific population management intervention is
drainage mechanisms, particularly at conflict hotspots. attempted. Wild Pig movements and ranging patterns,

10
 the reproductive behaviour of the animals and their • Landscape-level multi-stakeholder fora and
age–sex ratios over time also need to be examined appropriate working groups may be used to share
throughout the country. field experiences, learnings, evidence and conceptual
advances within the Forest Department, between
• To monitor trends and the efficacy of the ex gratia
stakeholders and across landscapes.
payment, data may be collected and analysed in
collaboration with other stakeholders, as appropriate. • Measures may be put in place to systematically
document field experiences, learnings, field-evidence
3.7 MEASURES TO STRENGTHEN and conceptual advances related to HWPC mitigation
THE SYSTEM OF KNOWLEDGE to inform future strategies and plans.
MANAGEMENT IN HWPC
MITIGATION
• To ensure that HWPC mitigation measures are
effective, wildlife-friendly and sustainable, it is
essential that field experiences, learnings, field-
evidence and conceptual advances, especially related
to crop protection measures, be not only shared
between key stakeholders and landscapes but also
documented to be utilised for future strategies and
plans related to HWPC mitigation.

4. D
 EPLOYING MEASURES TO PREVENT HUMAN–WILD
PIG CONFLICTS
4.1 MAPPING HWPC HOTSPOTS AND It may not be feasible to attempt individual identification of
MONITORING THE POPULATIONS AT a Wild Pig in a conflict situation beyond getting evidence
HOTSPOTS (such as digging, uprooting, trampling or news on
aggressive interactions with livestock or humans) of crop
HWC hotspots are areas with actual or predicted repeated foraging by Wild Pigs. Therefore, mitigation measures may
occurrences of HWC incidents that result in crop-loss, not be based on the individual-animal approach.
livestock death, human death and injury, and wildlife
• Groups of Wild Pigs-in-conflict, when identified, may
death and injury over temporal and spatial scales.
be characterised as casual (opportunistic) foragers or
• Identifying conflict hotspots that could also provide a as repeated (obligatory) crop foragers.
direction towards the drivers of conflict is critical for
– Opportunistic foragers may be Wild Pigs in their
providing site-specific solutions for mitigating human–
natural range occasionally crossing the periphery
Wild Pig conflict. HWPC hotspots may be mapped
of the forest into croplands, while obligatory
through geospatial assessments by using both primary
foragers are Wild Pigs that exclusively inhabit
and secondary data, including time-series data. The
croplands due to the sustained attractions.
hotspots can be identified and mapped as follows:
– Another way of identifying a group-in-conflict is by
– Incident hotspot: Frequency of occurrence
checking if particular populations are habituated
of incidences over a specific period (such as
to foraging particular sites/locations. This could
previous 5 or 10 years), mapped over the target
help decide if relocating a sounder-in-conflict, if
area. The data include the number of incidences
feasible, to another place, should be resorted to.
of crop and livestock injury and loss, injury and
death of humans.
– Vulnerability hotspot: Cumulative index
determined by overlaying past incidents, the
vulnerability of the local community and the
potential risk of the area.

11
 • The following steps may be taken to identify Wild Pig guarding methods used by the community. Mixing
groups-in-conflict: and alternating methods randomly may also be tried
so that the Wild Pigs do not get used to any particular
– The movement area of the above-mentioned
method easily.
categories of Wild Pig within croplands may be
first demarcated or mapped, including track- • There are other exclusionary devices and methods
marks and other distinct signs, to confirm the also that may be used to prevent Wild Pigs from
presence and absence of Wild Pigs. entering the crop fields:
– Investigate all conflict-related incidents within the – Visual (colourful, shiny plastic ribbons) or acoustic
region. deterrents
– Deploy a number of cameras at strategic locations, – Scare devices (beating of drums or empty tins)
if feasible and depending on the predicted
– Planting of thorny bushes around the crop area
movements of Wild Pig groups under observation.
(Euphorbia, Opuntia, Agave species)
– Investigate the existing camera trap photo
– Coconut ropes soaked in olfactory deterrents
database, if available, and attempt to identify
known individuals on the basis of any distinct 4.3 EFFECTIVE USE OF THE RAPID
morphological identification features. Prepare a RESPONSE TEAMS AND AWARENESS
short list of Wild Pigs for capture on the basis of
MEASURES
frequency of occurrence of conflicts.
HWPC mitigation usually does not necessitate the
4.2 SUPPORT LOCAL COMMUNITIES IN involvement of Rapid Response Teams, except in
CROP PROTECTION MEASURES situations where mass capture and rehabilitation are
required. Having well-functioning Community PRTs can
Education and awareness programmes may be carried
help address the situation.
out to sensitise the communities to using wildlife-friendly
crop protection measures and to the need for continuous • Community PRTs and RRTs may hold regular meetings,
improvisation. along with village panchayats and municipal councils,
for reviewing the HWPC and for joint preparedness to
• Since historical habitat fragmentation and loss are
handle any large-scale HWPC exercise in the future.
very difficult to address, the most suitable mitigation
measures for mitigating HWPC are effective crop • Community PRTs or personnel from the affected
protection measures, including fencing and crop community may be suitably trained in humane
guarding, to prevent Wild Pigs from venturing into aversion or driving techniques and provided with
croplands. support to implement the same in their localities
whenever required.
• Collaborative efforts by the SFDs and the agriculture
sector, using new technology, are required to develop • Besides involving local communities and various
innovative crop protection measures. stakeholders in mitigation of HWPC, making them
aware of Wild Pig behaviour is extremely important to
• Traditional barriers, such as rubble stacks, rubble
avoid any accidental encounters.
walls are chain-linked fences, may be used as Wild
Pig-proof barriers. The raw materials needed for – Creating awareness and presenting
making such barriers are easily available and such demonstrations of effective Wild Pig-proof fences
barriers are effective in preventing other wildlife through institutions for effective HWPC mitigation
species as well.
– Encouraging communities to change cropping
• More recently developed barriers such as buried metal patterns or growing crops that are not preferred
fences, diamond mesh grills, concrete fencing and or are less preferred by Wild Pigs, or even
solar fencing may be used for enhanced effectiveness. combinations of crops (growing preferred ones in
Seasonal/temporary fencing may be explored as an rows or guarded by non-preferred crops) conflict
alternative, as permanent barrier fences may interfere hotspots.
with many ecological processes.
• As animals such as Wild Pigs may get habituated to
deterrents quickly, there is a need to keep improvising
and changing deterrents, along with the regular crop-

12
4.4 SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT OF 4.5 ADDRESSING ZOONOTIC AND
WILD PIG POPULATION AT HWPC OTHER EMERGING DISEASES,
HOTSPOTS TAKING A ONE HEALTH APPROACH
Effective mitigation measures along with capture at HWPC Handling wild animals invariably involves a zoonotic risk.
hotspots can reduce the impacts on crop fields. Wild Pigs adapt to different types of habitat and forage
on different types of food, in addition to their behaviour
Mitigation measures leading to elimination of Wild Pig of alternating between forested and human-use areas,
populations from a landscape with natural habitats may leading to disease transmission.
not be beneficial for the health and stability of the overall
agro-ecological system in the landscape. Such measures • It is also important that transmission of diseases
may be implemented at forest-fringe areas and human- from domestic animals and feral pigs to Wild Pigs
dominated landscapes only after long-term studies have and eventually to other wild animals in the forests
been conducted and field-evidence of the possible be prevented by reducing the interactions of these
ecological impacts has been collected. animals.
• The veterinary capacities and infrastructure may be
Site-specific solutions are required, depending on whether
upgraded to facilitate disease-monitoring in Wild Pig
the Wild Pig population comes from the adjoining forests
populations for conservation and for prevention of the
or is resident entirely on the farmland. The population
spread of zoonotic diseases to livestock and human
connected to a forest may be a part of the prey base of
populations.
the predators inhabiting the natural forest. Therefore, any
mitigation measure that results in a significant reduction of • A well formulated Wildlife Health Management and
the Wild Pig population may affect the predator population Disease Surveillance Plan may be in place at every
as well. division/protected area.

In addition, another factor that could determine the nature • All the personnel involved in capture operations may
of the mitigation measures is whether the population be trained, vaccinated and equipped.
consists of small isolated herds or it is a large contiguous • The basic approach may be to integrate the concept
population occupying a large area. of One Health6, which links human and animal health
in a shared environment, into all the operations and
HWPC mitigation measures in the field.

6 One Health is a collaborative, multi-sectoral and trans-disciplinary approach—working at the local, regional, national and global levels—
with the goal of achieving optimal health outcomes, recognising the interconnection between people, animals, plants and their shared
environment.

13
 5. ADDRESSING THE EMERGENCY SITUATIONS ARISING
DUE TO HWPC
Emergency or crisis situations can be defined as situations 5.3 PREPAREDNESS OF RESPONSE
that are sudden and unexpected, have the potential to TEAMS
be serious in nature and therefore require immediate
• Detailed operating procedures may be laid down to
interventions in time and space from concerned
ensure that various response teams (community
stakeholders to minimise the loss of lives and assets.
PRTs, RRTs) are adequately established and they
This is an indicative list of potential emergency situations: are facilitated in their capacity development through
• A Wild Pig has killed/injured a person. training and other measures, including training
• A Wild Pig has damaged property/crops. sessions on occupational health and safety.
• A Wild Pig has entered a human-use area (agricultural
field or settlement area). 5.4 ACTION AT THE ONSET OF AN
• A Wild Pig has been injured or has died due to EMERGENCY OR SPECIFIC
retaliatory action. SITUATION
Key response procedures may be established, and • Operating procedures may be laid down to receive,
actions may be promptly implemented for addressing channelise and disseminate information at the onset of
emergency situations. Detailed step-by-step guidance may any emergency from the site of the incident to related
be developed as ‘Operating Procedures for Addressing forest officials and the HWC Mitigation Hub. The
Emergency response Situations’. information may be disseminated further to requisition
a related response action at the emergency site.
The key emergency response procedures may include the
following. 5.5 KEY RESPONSE ACTIONS DURING
AND AFTER AN EMERGENCY
5.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF EMERGENCY
• Operating procedures may be laid down, in line
RESPONSE MECHANISM with the other guidelines issued by MoEF&CC, for
• A robust mechanism to promptly trigger an emergency stepwise key actions, for all emergency situations,
response may be established in all HWC hotspots. The media engagement, crowd management, addressing
mechanism may include early detection of the incident health emergencies and post-response operation for
to communication with key officials and information management of the animal. This includes ensuring the
dissemination for initiation of appropriate response animal’s health and safety during capture, transport,
actions at the site. selection of a translocation site and monitoring the
animal after the animal is released safely into the wild.
5.2 INTRA- AND INTER-AGENCY
COORDINATION AND COOPERATION
• Procedures may be laid down in each HWPC hotspot,
in line with these guidelines, and in line with the
institutional framework suggested under the HWC-
NAP, to ensure timely coordination amongst the
various response teams (the Forest Department,
Agriculture Department and agricultural institutions,
District Administration, the Police, the fire services,
the Animal Husbandry Department, the Health
Department and the local community, especially local
panchayat leaders and community PRTs).

14
6. REDUCING THE IMPACT OF HWPC ON THE HEALTH
AND OVERALL WELL-BEING OF HUMANS
6.1 ADDRESSING THE SITUATION OF • Collaborative efforts may be made to promote market-
LOSS OF HUMAN LIFE based arrangements for alternate crops, wherever
feasible. Community PRTs may be engaged to
• Part of the ex gratia payment may be made
facilitate this process in their respective villages/areas
immediately to the victim’s family/heirs, and the
of operation.
balance payment may be made at the earliest.
• The process of settling ex gratia payment for crop or
• The payments to the victim’s family should be made
property loss should be transparent and simplified.
into their bank accounts.
• Mobile apps should be used for collecting the
• In the HWPC hotspots, a revolving fund may also be
information and processing the claims of farmers
established, at the division-level, to ensure that funds
related to crop damage caused by Wild Pigs to ensure
are available for providing immediate relief to the
that there is efficiency and transparency in the system.
victim/family.
• Farmers may be encouraged and facilitated through
6.2 ADDRESSING THE SITUATION OF community-based institutions to explore solutions
LOSS OF LIVESTOCK such as changes in cropping patterns and the use of
crops that are non-palatable to Wild Pigs.
Loss or injury of livestock due to HWPC is occasional or rare.
• Site-specific studies may be conducted in collaboration
• A livestock insurance scheme, additionally covering with agricultural research institutes to find appropriate
accidental injury or death from interactions with crops that are non-palatable to Wild Pigs, and for
Wild Pigs, as with wild carnivore species may be finding effective crop guarding methods.
facilitated by the SFD, in collaboration with the Animal
Husbandry Department. Livestock loss may also be • The Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare has
compensated by replacement with good-quality high- included crop depredation by wild animals under its
yielding livestock if adequate funds are available. flagship scheme, Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana
(PMFBY). This scheme may be used as an important
• Stall-feeding of cattle may also reduce their venturing HWPC mitigation instrument.
into the forest and encountering wild animals such
as Wild Pigs. Besides reducing the chances of loss of • Dialogue may be initiated with the insurance sector for
livestock to wild carnivores, stall-feeding also reduces providing insurance cover for damage due to HWPC.
the spread of zoonotic diseases from wild populations Insurance can be considered for damage to standing
to domestic animals. crops besides injuries/loss of life sustained by human
beings. The modalities may vary for such insurance
6.3 ADDRESSING THE SITUATION OF from place to place according to the assessment of
LOSS OF CROP/PROPERTY risk by the insurance companies. The feasibility at the
state level may also be explored.
Key manifestations of HWPC is damage to crops, property
(damage to fences, houses, etc.) and other assets (livestock
injury/death). Rarely, encounters may lead to human injury
or death. The crop damage due to Wild Pig activities varies
from state to state. Therefore, different measures may be
implemented as per the situation:

A wide range of approaches could be envisaged that

encourage local communities to live and prosper in a
Wild Pig habitat. These approaches may be based on the
principles of co-existence, co-management, participatory
planning, risk assessment, strategies used to change
perceptions, poverty alleviation programmes, community-
based natural resource management and other forms of
stakeholder engagement.

15
 7. REDUCING THE IMPACT OF HWPC ON THE HEALTH
AND WELL-BEING OF WILD PIGS
7.1 OVERALL MEASURES • Driving (herding) and loading methods may be
standardised through repeated testing.
All care should be taken to address the issues of animal
welfare and animal rights as enshrined in the Constitution • The capture equipment should be manufactured
(Articles 48A and 51A(g)) and the statutory provisions or procured as per specifications provided by the
of the Indian Penal Code (Sections 428 and 429), the MoEF&CC or the relevant national institutions.
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act of 1960 (Section Field staff should be trained in the use and regular
11(1)(h) and Section 11(1)(d)), the Motor Vehicles Act, maintenance of the equipment. Customised vehicles
1978 (Transport of Animal) Rules, 2001) and guidelines may be designed for transporting captured Wild Pigs
issued by the MoEF&CC. immediately from the capture site to a rescue centre/
lifetime care or translocation site.
7.2 ADDRESSING THE HEALTH AND • If captured animals are released in the wild, they may be
WELL-BEING OF WILD PIGS DURING marked for identification (using RFID tags, if available
CAPTURE AND TRANSLOCATION and feasible), and all encounters may be recorded
and reported to a central database. If the number of
Translocation of captured Wild Pigs to a new location can
translocated animals is large (100 or more), a monthly
also translocate the HWPC to that location if the governing
assessment of the numbers released may be made to
factors are not kept in mind. Therefore, decisions relating
ascertain the status of the population. Identification-
to release sites may be based on scientific data (e.g., an
marking during the release may facilitate post-capture
area where the species is not present should thus be
monitoring for getting information for decision-making
avoided; areas where other populations of the Wild Pig are
mitigation measures.
present should be reviewed.

The decision about translocation, lifetime care or the use

of any scientific population management method on
captured Wild Pigs needs to be taken much before the
capture operation, ideally at the planning stage itself.
• All captures may be planned and executed with utmost
care as these procedures carry the risk of injury to both
the animals and the handler/staff members involved.

16
8. U
 SE OF LEARNINGS FROM THE GUIDELINES TO
FURTHER STRENGTHEN INSTITUTIONAL AND POLICY
FRAMEWORK ON HWPC MITIGATION IN INDIA
These guidelines are expected to serve as a capacity tuning these mitigation measures and for understanding
development instrument, given that a robust and structured capacity needs for effectively implementing the
feedback mechanism will be put in place to document the mitigation measures.
feedback arising from their implementation.
• In the long term, the consolidated feedback may also
• The feedback arising from the use of these guidelines be used in further review of the capacity development
may, therefore, be consolidated to form the basis for fine- strategies, HWC-MAPs, HWC-SAPs and HWC-NAP.

9. PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT, PILOT-TESTING OF

THESE GUIDELINES AND THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
• A dedicated framework of experts (Annexe 1) was independent wildlife and policy experts, was formed
formed that consisted of representatives of Government for the overall steering and facilitation of the process. A
agencies, SFDs, research institutions, civil society ‘Working Group on Pilot Implementation of Guidelines
institutions and international organizations and and HWC-NAP’ was formed to facilitate the planning
independent wildlife policy experts. The experts were and implementation of the pilot testing, consultations
a mix of scientists, wildlife managers, policy experts and final editing of the draft guidelines and the HWC-
and capacity development experts. NAP. Detailed terms of reference were provided, and
meetings and workshops of the author groups were
• A common understanding was developed on the overall
facilitated under the Indo-German Cooperation Project
purpose, scope, approach and methodology7. The
on Human–Wildlife Conflict Mitigation.
experts played different roles in the drafting and editing
process (Coordinating Lead Authors, Lead Authors, • The draft guidelines and HWC-NAP were pilot
Contributing Authors, Review Editors). The Author tested at selected HWC hotspots in India to receive
Group worked on developing these guidelines between feedback on the feasibility and acceptability of the
July 2019 and February 2022, during which time they recommendations expressed in the guidelines, using
consulted a larger group of experts and stakeholders via structured processes and tools. On the basis of the
workshops, meetings and consultations. The authors feedback received during fortnightly meetings and
reviewed the documents and guidelines available one-to-one consultations with managers, the draft of
from the MoEF&CC and different states, and relevant the guidelines was revised.
information and recommendations were brought
• A Committee was constituted by MoEFCC in December
into this new document. A National Technical Group
2022, consisting of officials from MoEFCC, and the
(NTG), consisting of experts from MoEF&CC, Wildlife
state forest departments of Bihar, Haryana, Karnataka,
Institute of India (WII) and Deutsche Gesellschaft
Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal
für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and
to review and finalize the guidelines.

10. MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF GUIDELINES

• This set of guidelines is not a static document; rather, it 2023 onwards. However, a mid-term review process
is a living document. It will keep abreast of the various may be desirable in 2024. In the long term, the review
developments in field implementation methods and cycle of these guidelines can be aligned with the review
wildlife research. For this to happen, the feedback from cycle of HWC-NAP.
field practitioners and other wildlife experts may be
• The mechanism, templates and guidance for collating
analysed to assess the specific elements and sections
information and feedback on the use of these guidelines
that need to undergo changes. A review of these
may be elaborated.
guidelines is planned to take place every 5 years from

7 Approach paper: [Link]

17
 ANNEXE 1
NATIONAL TECHNICAL GROUP (NTG)
Shri Bivash Ranjan, IFS, Additional Director General of Forest (Wildlife),
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), Government of India (GoI)
Dr S P Yadav, IFS, Former Additional Director General General of Forest (WL), MoEF&CC, GoI
Chairperson
(December 2021 to March 1, 2022)
Shri Soumitra Dasgupta, IFS, Former Additional Director General of Forest (WL), MoEF&CC, GoI
(June 2019 to November 2021)
Shri Rohit Tiwari, Inspector General of Forest (WL), MoEF&CC, GoI Member
Shri Rakesh Kumar Jagenia, Deputy Inspector General of Forest (WL), MoEF&CC, GoI Member
Dr Sunil Sharma, IFS, Joint Director (WL), MoEF&CC, GoI
Member
Dr R. Gopinath, IFS, Former Joint Director (WL), MoEF&CC, GoI (June 2019 to December 2020)
Director, Wildlife Institute of India (WII) Member
Shri P C Tyagi
Member
IFS (Retd.), Former Principle Chief Conservator of Forests-Head of Forest Force, Tamil Nadu
Late Shri Ajay Desai
Member
Wildlife Expert (June 2019 to November 20, 2020)
Dr Sanjay Gubbi
Member
Wildlife Expert, Nature Conservation Foundation (June 2019 to November 20, 2020)
Dr Neeraj Khera
Member Convenor
Team Leader, Indo-German Project on HWC Mitigation, GIZ India

WORKING GROUP ON PILOT IMPLEMENTATION OF GUIDELINES AND HWC-NAP

Dr. Neeraj Khera, Team Leader, Indo-German Project on HWC Mitigation, GIZ India (Member Facilitator)
Dr. Bhaskar Acharya, Independent Wildlife and Documentation Expert
Ms Naghma Firdaus, Disaster Management Specialist
Shri Ramesh Menon, Media Expert
Shri C. Sasi Kumar, Technical Officer, MoEF&CC
Shri Aditya Bisht, Project Elephant-MoEF&CC
Shri Siddhanta Das, IFS (Retd.), Former Director General of Forest & Special Secretary, MoEF&CC
Shri Ajai Misra, IFS (Retd.), Former PCCF (WL), Karnataka
Shri Sanjay Srivastava, IFS (Retd.), Former PCCF—HOFF, Tamil Nadu
Shri P. C. Tyagi, IFS (Retd.), Former PCCF—HOFF, Tamil Nadu
Dr. C. Ramesh, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India
Dr. K. Ramesh, Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India
Shri Surendra Varma, Asian Nature Conservation Foundation
Dr. Nayanika Singh, M&E and Policy Expert

AUTHOR GROUP FOR DRAFTING THE GUIDELINES

Shri Qamar Qureshi, Scientist G & Head, Department of Population Management, Capture and Coordinating Lead Author
Rehabilitation, Wildlife Institute of India
Dr. Lallianpuii Kawlni, Scientist C, Endangered Species Management, Wildlife Institute of India Lead Authors
Dr. Rishi Kumar, Wildlife Expert
Dr. S. K. Khanduri, IFS, Former IGF (WL), MoEF&CC

Dr. N. P. S. Chauhan, Director, Amity Institute of Forestry and Wildlife (AIFW), Amity University Contributing Authors
Dr. Kafil Hussain, Scientist on Deputation, Wildlife Institute of India
Dr. Sanath K. Muliya, Project Scientist, Wildlife Institute of India
Dr. Divya Ramesh, WWF India
Dr. H. S. Pabla, IFS (Retd.), Former PCCF (WL) & CWW, Madhya Pradesh Review Editors
Shri Sanjay K. Srivastava, IFS (Retd.), Former PCCF- HOFF, Tamil Nadu
Shri P. C. Tyagi, IFS (Retd.), Former PCCF- HOFF, Tamil Nadu

18
Photo credits:
Cover page: Ms. Mira Amtmann/GIZ
Inside back cover: Dr. Neeraj Khera/GIZ
 Designed by Aspire Design, New Delhi

Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

Government of India
2023