valuing wildness in animals: elephants2).pdfvaluing wildness in animals: elephants jamie lorimer...

Valuing wildness in animals: Elephants

Jamie LorimerGeography Kings College London

My researchy esea c

• Cultural geographer informed by sociology of science, ‘more-than-human’ philosophy, environmental science

• Wildlife in the Anthropocene. How to live well with nonhumans without making recourse to Nature

- International volunteering and the histories and practices of elephant conservation in Sri Lankapractices of elephant conservation in Sri Lanka

- Rewilding, back-breeding and reintroductions in European wildlife conservationp

Aims and structures a d st uctu e

• Thinking with elephants to identify concepts, methods and political-ethical resources for animal studies, with a special focus on ‘wildness’

• Elephants• Wildness

Wild i l h t• Wildness in elephants• Conclusions

Why elephants?Why elephants?

• Proboscidea (two/three species) is the most researched taxonomic order (May, 1988)

• Broad geographic distribution• Broad geographic distribution• Threatened• High order mammal with complex ethology and social• High order mammal with complex ethology and social

dynamics• Huge cultural appeal both past and present• Multiple and diverse modes of human-animal relations

African and Asian elephants

Elephas maximus T t l l ti f 41• Total population of 41-

52,000 (Sukumar, 2003)

‘Globally Threatened’• ‘Globally Threatened’ (IUCN 2009)

Elephas maximus T t l l ti f 41 52 000

Loxodonta africanaTotal population of 41-52,000 (Sukumar, 2003)IUCN: Endangered

Total population of 400-600,000 (ZSL, 2011)IUCN: Vulnerable

WildnessWildness

• Not as a pure place or untouched being set in• Not as a pure place or untouched being, set in opposition to the domestic, the human, the urban or even the countryside. Wildness ≠ wilderness

• Instead wildness as a set of processes or ways of becoming; not all of which are positive. These cross species boundaries

• Wildness has long been a concern for biopolitics –forms of state, religious, market and scientific management – e.g. biodiversity, biosecurity, hygiene

Modern ways of relating to nonhumansModern ways of relating to nonhumans

Wildness and elephantsWildness and elephants

Elephant as ‘companionElephant as companion species’ (Haraway, 2008):

Too social and sagacious- Too social and sagacious to be resources;

- Too strange to be human; g ;- Too captive to be wild,

but; ld b- Too wild to be

domesticated.

Elephants as companion species in Sri Lanka

Long history of captivity and g y p ymahoutship – but no captive breeding (therefore no breeds).

Fraught co-existence and adaptation to inhabited landscapes –edge species, flourish in disturbededge species, flourish in disturbed habitats

High levels of human-elephant conflict in marginal rural areasconflict in marginal, rural areas

Methods: Tracing human-elephant companionship

1 Taking place within socio-ecological assemblages1. Taking place within socio-ecological assemblages

Methods: tracing human-elephant companionship

2 Involving intermingled human and nonhuman bodies2. Involving intermingled human and nonhuman bodies

Phylogeography: histories of elephant trade

Microbiology: Zoonotic disease and hyper-extinction events

Environmental history: secondary habitats

Methods: tracing human-elephant companionship

3 Ethologies/animal behaviors3. Ethologies/animal behaviors

Valuing the wildness of elephants as companion species

• Nonhuman difference• Flourishing

C lit i t li• Cosmopolitan environmentalism

DifferenceDifference

• The nature of nonhuman difference is key concern for• The nature of nonhuman difference is key concern for conservation and environmental ethics – establishes the units of concern

FIRST CUT = Species f i th t b d- a group of organisms that can breed


SECOND CUT = sub-speciesSECOND CUT = sub-species

- ‘Splitters’ and ‘lumpers’ amongst Asian elephant taxonomists claim between 2 and 5 sub-speciestaxonomists claim between 2 and 5 sub species

- Differentiated by their genes and their morphology

- Disaggregates Elephas maximus into ‘Evolutionary Significant Units’ (Fleischer et al., 2001 ; Vidya et al., 2005) that should be maintained in isolation.2005) that should be maintained in isolation.

- Based on a model of wild animals evolving in isolation


THIRD CUT = companion species 1THIRD CUT = companion species 1- Phylogeography of Asian elephant reveals long history

of human capture, trade and escape- Feral animals on the Andaman islands don’t count


FOURTH CUT = companion species 2FOURTH CUT = companion species 2

- Ethology of the Asian elephant reveals that the animal is sagacious and adapts to humans = multiple ‘elephantis sagacious and adapts to humans = multiple elephant cultures’


These 4 CUTS generate contrasting models of nonhumanThese 4 CUTS generate contrasting models of nonhuman difference and units of concern

=> What forms of difference matter and why?

FlourishingFlourishing

• An approach to environmental ethics/politics that takes nonhuman difference seriously and seeks to allow significant forms of difference to flourishg


Two modes of companionship that matter in Sri Lanka:• Captivity

F i i t• Free-ranging coexistence


Captivity:

- Captive elephants often have very poor mental and physical health


Captivity:

- However they are socialised into captivity – they can not just be ‘liberated’

- Shift from free-contact model based on elephant domination and ‘learned helplessness’ to non-contact model involving voluntary participation

- Elephant rehabilitation – PTSD and elephants


Free-ranging coexistence:

- Frequent conflict between farmers and 65-70% of the elephant population that ranges outside of PAsranges outside of PAs

- Traditionally managed by fencing translocation andfencing, translocation and culling. Binary spatial logic.


Free-ranging coexistence:

- Shift to ‘temporal resource partitioning’ and ‘dynamic reserves’ (Bengtsson et al., 2003). Encouraging traditional chena agriculture

- New technologies for co-habitation: fencing-in, chilies, bees, sound, etc.

CosmopolitanismCosmopolitanism

• Companionship does not and will not emerge in a• Companionship does not and will not emerge in a political economic vacuum

• Fraught history of speaking for Nature in Sri Lanka• Fraught history of speaking for Nature in Sri Lanka (Jazeel, 2005)

• Knowledge politics involved in speaking for elephantsKnowledge politics involved in speaking for elephants (Thompson, 2002)


• Elephants are archetypal ‘cosmopolitan animals’ (Jalaiscosmopolitan animals (Jalais, 2008)

• Act as ‘boundary objects’• Act as boundary objects

• Generate a great deal of ‘friction’ (Tsing 2005)friction (Tsing, 2005)


Friction:1. Between urban and international conservationists and

rural famers whose livelihoods are threatenedrural famers whose livelihoods are threatened


Friction:2. Between urban and international animal welfarists and Sri Lankanand Sri Lankan mahouts and private owners.

ConclusionsConclusions

• Thinking of elephants as companion species helps value• Thinking of elephants as companion species helps value their wildness without essentialising them as sub-humans, resources or ‘denizens of the wilderness’

• Demands new concepts, methodologies and politics/ethics for animal studies

• Potential of interdisciplinary work across the humanities and the social and natural sciences

• There is wildness in the Anthropocene, but it emerges as a risk, a promise and a set of responsibilities , p p

valuing wildness in animals: elephants2).pdfvaluing wildness in animals: elephants jamie lorimer...

Documents