Scholarlink

<p>The inconvenient truth of wildlife co-existence lies in the circumstantial need of species to capitulate to each other’s will, but how far are we willing to go? Over the decades, the conservative view of eco-centric legislation has legally blanketed the scheduled species from the human acts of hunting, culling, assaulting, and the like. However, as the human population increases, this protected animal population, particularly those undomesticated ones in predator-less areas of the wild, increases exponentially beyond the land-carrying capacity of their habitats. Thus, the soundness of wildlife co-existence has been profoundly disrupted by wild boars (<i>sus scrofa</i>) through incessant encroachments, agricultural and economic damage, human fatalities, etc. Therefore, in light of the concurrent call for the declaration of <i>vermin status</i> of <i>wild boars</i> under the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, the paper aims to ascertain the legal and scientific efficacy of culling wild boars in comparison to the preventive strategies used over the years. This is achievable through a jurisprudential and scientific justification facilitated by the theories of anthropocentrism, eco-centrism, utilitarianism, and categorical imperativeness, alongside the capabilities approach. The research methodology entails a doctrinal approach wherein it contains participative observation, statistics, eco-legal analysis, numerical data, etc. Additionally, in the absence of current data on the wild boar population, an exploratory method has been employed in the study area to form a statistical estimation by speculating the reproductive pattern of wild boars. This evidence depicts the preponderance of understanding the interrelation of multiple disciplines by objectifying the currently understudied damage control methods. </p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The intersection of law and wildlife management: A case study on culling of wild boars in Kerala

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月1日

查看全文
  • Anna Anto

摘要

The inconvenient truth of wildlife co-existence lies in the circumstantial need of species to capitulate to each other’s will, but how far are we willing to go? Over the decades, the conservative view of eco-centric legislation has legally blanketed the scheduled species from the human acts of hunting, culling, assaulting, and the like. However, as the human population increases, this protected animal population, particularly those undomesticated ones in predator-less areas of the wild, increases exponentially beyond the land-carrying capacity of their habitats. Thus, the soundness of wildlife co-existence has been profoundly disrupted by wild boars (sus scrofa) through incessant encroachments, agricultural and economic damage, human fatalities, etc. Therefore, in light of the concurrent call for the declaration of vermin status of wild boars under the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, the paper aims to ascertain the legal and scientific efficacy of culling wild boars in comparison to the preventive strategies used over the years. This is achievable through a jurisprudential and scientific justification facilitated by the theories of anthropocentrism, eco-centrism, utilitarianism, and categorical imperativeness, alongside the capabilities approach. The research methodology entails a doctrinal approach wherein it contains participative observation, statistics, eco-legal analysis, numerical data, etc. Additionally, in the absence of current data on the wild boar population, an exploratory method has been employed in the study area to form a statistical estimation by speculating the reproductive pattern of wild boars. This evidence depicts the preponderance of understanding the interrelation of multiple disciplines by objectifying the currently understudied damage control methods.