Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
percent. By 1994, the original group of 20 rhesus had grown to 89, and by
2004, to 227 monkeys.
The Qasimpur group has continued to expand, and by July of 2008, it num-
bered 258 rhesus (
Figure 11.3
). Surprisingly, the people of Qasimpur were not
yet complaining. In fact, some of them said that “Hanuman had brought these
monkeys to us and we are not to disturb.” Nevertheless, this Qasimpur trans-
location provided a dramatic example that translocation is not a valid manage-
ment procedure to limit or control India's rhesus population.
If the Qasimpur group is added to our original Aligarh eight census groups,
the total population of rhesus that we have recently censused in Aligarh District
is now 1,002, an increase of 473 percent in the past 40 years (since the low
point of 1969). We must also add that our sample of rhesus in Aligarh District
does not include all rhesus in the Aligarh area and neighboring towns. For
example, we did not cover the Aligarh temple area, local railroad stations, local
industrial plants, or several towns, where rhesus groups are present. An inten-
sive rhesus study in the Aligarh area by Dr. Ekwal Imam of Aligarh University
in the 1990s included eight additional groups and counted a total rhesus popu-
lation of 1,337 by 1995, at a time when our sample totaled only 540 (Imam,
2000
). It is clear, therefore, that our Aligarh sample does not include all rhe-
sus in the area, although we feel it is representative of rhesus populations and
trends where rhesus occur in India, because it contains typical habitats and
human population patterns.
Discussion
It is apparent that several forces have combined in India to alter the ecological
relationships of human and non-human primates. With the combination of
rapid human population growth and rapid rhesus population growth, interact-
ing with forest destruction and conversion, plus the commensal tendency of
rhesus to adapt to human villages, towns and cities, rhesus groups are now
often considered pest problems. Both agricultural losses and health and safety
issues are increasingly evident, including occasional serious attacks on humans
by rhesus.
Agricultural problems have been highlighted in rice, wheat, and soybean
areas, where agribusiness has taken a strong stand against rhesus, but individ-
ual villagers are even more vulnerable to crop depredations. Fruit orchards
are especially susceptible to rhesus damage: mango, papaya, bananas, apples,
pears, and peaches. In a farm associated with Aligarh University on the edge
of the city, the farm manager felt that 20-25 percent of his mango, papaya, and
banana crop was lost to rhesus monkeys, although we have no specific data
