The Silent Massacre: Sri Lanka's Elephants Caught Between Policy and Bullets

Viduravi Athulathmudali
Jul 26, 2025
9 min read

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Lalith Athulathmudali Advanced Research Centre (LAARC). LAARC does not endorse or assume any responsibility for the views expressed herein.

The majestic giants of Sri Lanka, revered as a symbol of strength and wisdom in the island nation's cultural heritage, now finds itself in an unprecedented crisis of survival. What began as a long-standing human-elephant conflict has transformed into a massacre of these gentle giants, recently triggered by governmental policies that prioritize agricultural interests over wildlife conservation. The distribution of over 13,000 firearms to farmers and the protection of villages, coupled with a controversial, yet recent statement by a Minister, encouraging farmers to "take any action that is possible" against crop-damaging animals, has created a perfect storm threatening the very existence of the Sri Lankan Elephant.

A Crisis Decades in the Making

Sri Lanka's human-elephant conflict (HEC) is not a recent phenomenon. For decades, this island nation has grappled with increasing confrontations between humans and elephants as development projects, agricultural expansion, and population growth have systematically fragmented and destroyed elephant habitats. The statistics have always paint a grim picture, with Sri Lanka currently having the highest number of elephant deaths caused by conflict with humans globally, and the second-highest number of human deaths caused by elephants.

Over the past 15 years, nearly 5,000 elephants and 1,600 people have been killed in these clashes. The most striking pattern emerges from the 2010s onward, where annual elephant deaths consistently exceeded 200, with a sharp upward trajectory beginning in 2018 when deaths first surpassed 300. The crisis reached unprecedented levels in 2022 with 433 deaths, followed by the highest recorded figure of 488 deaths in 2023. Notably, 2024 showed the first reduction in nearly a decade to 388 deaths, coinciding with limited implementation of the National Action Plan, with 84 deaths attributed to gunshots, 56 to electrocution, and 52 to consuming explosive devices known as "hakka patas" or jaw bombs. The crisis is staggering and the trend shows no signs of abating. To make things worst, within the first seven months of 2025, 198 wild elephants have already been killed.

The Fatal Policy Shift

The current crisis reached a tipping point following statements made by the Minister of Agriculture, who declared in Parliament that farmers could take any action regarding damages to crops by wild animals within their cultivated lands. "Take any action that is possible," the Minister stated, effectively providing what many interpreted as carte blanche for farmers, and perhaps other opportunistic poachers, to use lethal force against elephants and tuskers.

The statement coincided with an alarming escalation in the government's approach to wildlife management. Instead of the traditional air rifles that were previously distributed for crop protection, weapons that could injure but rarely kill elephants, authorities began issuing 12-bore guns or SG guns, which are lethal to elephants. Understanding this difference is crucial, since air rifles might deter elephants through pain or injury, 12-bore guns deliver sufficient stopping power to kill these massive creatures outright.

The scientific evidence is unequivocal about the lethality of these weapons. An air rifie, typically generates 20-100 joules of energy with the lightweight pellets, and therefore lacks sufficient penetration power to reach any vital organs of the elephant. While it is very likely to cause pain to the elephant and temporary deterrence, they rarely prove fatal, allowing the epehant to recover from its wounds. However, unlike air rifles, which lack the penetration power to reach vital organs in elephants a 12-bore shotgun may cause fatal injuries to elephants. Provided that a 12-bore shotgun can generate 2000-4000+ Joules of energy with the projectiles weighing between 28g-38g, a 12-gauge slug while may not be the optimal elephant hunting caliber, is certainly capable of killing these animals when used repeatedly or with proper shot placement. Perhaps even more unfortunately, cause a slow and agonizing death for the elephant, often taking weeks before it finally succumbs to its injuries, similar to the tragic case of Bhathiya.

The Tragic Case of Bhathiya

The cost of the apparent inability of successive government to maintain or advance any sustainable resolution to this issue became viscerally apparent in the case of Bhathiya, a beloved tusker whose prolonged suffering and eventual death in July 2025 became a symbol of the crisis. Bhathiya, estimated to be between 30 and 35 years old, had been repeatedly targeted by gunshots, sustaining multiple wounds that left him partially paralyzed and in excruciating pain.

First spotted with injuries in February 2025 within the Nikaweratiya wildlife zone, Bhathiya's condition deteriorated over months as he struggled with gunshot wounds to his right front leg and trunk, which damaged his nervous system and severely limited his mobility. This raises another pertinent question concerning the resources allocated to wildlife conservation. In a recent Parliamentary debate, the relevant subject minister revealed that there were only 12 wildlife veterinarians for the entire island. This is an alarming shortage, and illustrates the urgent need of increased investment in this sector. Concerns had previously been raised by the State Veterinary Surgeons' Association about the shortage of veterinarians in the state sector. Although the state veterinarian cadre is supposed to have over 900 positions, only 680 veterinarians are currently serving.

A Sinister Pattern Emerges

As the death toll of elephants continues to rise, mere observation and disturbing evidence seems to suggest that the crisis may no longer be the result of isolated incidents, but rather part of a more calculated and coordinated campaign. The Minister of Environment himself made these remarks in Parliament observing that all the animals were shot in the same area, below the knee.

In the vacuum of effective policy and enforcement, opportunistic groups appear to be taking matters into their own hands, weaponizing the government's silence and tacit approval to carry out systematic killings. This emerging pattern raises urgent questions about the complicity of the state in the ongoing situation, not just through negligence, but through the active encouragement of violence under the guise of agricultural protection.

Scientific Evidence Against Current Approaches

The scientific community has been unequivocal in its condemnation of existing policy approaches to minimise human-elephant conflict (HEC). Research conducted over decades has consistently shown that traditional elephant management strategies, including elephant drives, translocation, and the distribution of lethal weapons, not only fail to resolve human-elephant conflict but actually tend to exacerbate it.

A comprehensive study of elephant translocation in Sri Lanka, the first of its kind globally, tracked 16 translocated elephants with GPS collars and found that the practice "defeats both HEC mitigation and elephant conservation goals". All translocated elephants either left the parks where they were released or were killed, with the practice actually causing "wider propagation and intensification of HEC, and increased elephant mortality".

Similarly, elephant drives, which are operations that involve hundreds of people creating large-scale disturbance, lighting thousands of firecrackers, and shooting at elephants with rubber bullets to drive them away, have been proven scientifically ineffective. These operations subject elephants to severe stress and trauma, leading them to become "terrified of people and responding with increased aggression upon encountering humans". As one expert noted, "There is no record of a successful elephant drive in Sri Lanka as elephants return and they're more aggressive because they associate humans with trauma".

While electric fencing has been promoted as a solution to human-elephant conflict, the reality on the ground tells a very different story. Despite Sri Lanka having approximately 5,000 kilometers of fencing, most installations have failed due to poor maintenance, improper placement, and lack of community involvement. Elephants, with their remarkable intelligence, have learned to breach these barriers, making them less effective over time.

The key issue is not the technology itself but its implementation. Research has shown that electric fences work best when located on ecological boundaries, that is where natural elephant habitat ends and development begins, rather than on arbitrary administrative boundaries which are currently considered. However, relocating fences to these appropriate locations faces strong opposition from both the public and politicians, highlighting the need for a fundamental shift in mindset.

A Science-Based Alternative: The National Action Plan

In stark contrast to the current approach, Sri Lanka developed a comprehensive, science-based National Action Plan (NAP) for the Mitigation of Human-Elephant Conflict in 2020. The NAP recommends abandoning failed methods like elephant drives and translocation in favor of proven strategies such as community-based permanent village electric fencing and seasonal agricultural electric fencing to protect villages and farmlands from elephant depredation. When partially implemented between 2022 and 2024, these measures contributed to the first reduction in both human and elephant fatalities in nine years.

The plan's effectiveness was demonstrated through the construction of approximately 285 seasonal paddy field fences in 2024, which helped reduce elephant deaths from 488 in 2023 to 388 in 2024. The NAP's community-based electric fencing approach proved successful in pilot implementations. As Kurunegala District Secretary D. Dissanayake noted, "We saw what worked: Community engagement, smart fencing, localised solutions". However, momentum was lost when the government changed, and authorities returned to failed traditional tactics driven by politics rather than science. However, with the economic crisis and new authorities in power, the implementation of the NAP seems to be at risk, with a new committee appointed to restudy HEC and provide recommendations. For a country long accustomed with a lack of national policies, this absence is continues to take a significant toll on its elephant population as well.

The irony of the current situation is particularly stark given that elephants are legally protected under Sri Lankan law. The Sri Lankan elephant is classified as endangered, and killing one carries the death penalty under the country's legislation. However, this legal protection exists largely on paper, with enforcement remaining woefully inadequate.

An Economic Consequence

Beyond ecological and ethical ramifications, the ongoing elephant crisis poses a direct threat to Sri Lanka’s economy, particularly Sri Lanka's tourism industry, which relies heavily on wildlife as a major attraction. Forbes magazine named Sri Lanka "The Best Destination for Safari Outside of Africa," largely due to its elephant populations. The country's national parks, particularly those known for elephant gatherings like Minneriya and Kaudulla, attract thousands of international visitors annually.

However, the declining elephant population threatens this vital economic sector. If current trends continue, elephants could become extinct in the wild in Sri Lanka within 10-20 years, devastating the country's wildlife tourism potential. The economic implications extend far beyond direct tourism revenue, affecting local communities, hotels, guides, and countless businesses that depend on elephant-related tourism.

Studies have shown that tourists are willing to pay significantly more for nature conservation, especially elephant conservation, through mechanisms like embarkation taxes. This willingness to pay could be harnessed to create sustainable funding for conservation efforts and farmer compensation schemes, creating a win-win situation for all stakeholders.

Urgent Need for Government Intervention

The current trajectory of human-wildlife conflict is unsustainable and demands urgent intervention from the highest levels of government. Immediate policy reversal is critical; the government must retract its prior statement encouraging farmers to "take any action" against wildlife and clearly reaffirm that killing protected species is illegal and subject to prosecution.

In parallel, the 13,000 firearms recently distributed to farmers should be urgently recalled and replaced with non-lethal alternatives, such as air rifles or other humane deterrents suited for crop protection. The scientifically grounded National Action Plan (NAP) for Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation must be implemented in full, with adequate funding, institutional support, and political will to ensure long-term impact.

Furthermore, the government must reform the compensation system for farmers who suffer genuine agricultural losses, potentially leveraging tourism revenue to fund a fair and efficient scheme that removes incentives for violent retaliation against wildlife. Lastly, immediate steps must be taken to safeguard and restore elephant habitats. This includes establishing and maintaining functional wildlife corridors and halting further encroachment into critical elephant ranges. Only through these decisive actions can we achieve a sustainable coexistence between rural communities and wildlife.

Conclusion: A Crossroads for Conservation

Sri Lanka stands at a critical crossroads. The current path of arming farmers and encouraging lethal responses to human-elephant conflict has created a path that will inevitably lead to the extinction of these majestic animals. The death of Bhathiya and hundreds of other elephants should not be in vain. Their sacrifice must serve as a wake-up call for immediate action to reverse the current destructive policies and implement evidence-based solutions that have been proven to work.

The choices made in the coming months will determine whether future generations will witness the majesty of wild elephants roaming the landscapes of Sri Lanka or whether they will only see them in history books as another species lost to short-sighted policies and human indifference. The elephants of Sri Lanka have survived for millennia, adapting to changing landscapes and climates. They have the intelligence and resilience to coexist with humans if they are given the chance. The question now is whether the authorities and stakeholders of this issue in Sri Lanka have the wisdom and courage to choose coexistence over extinction, science over politics, and long-term sustainability over short-term convenience.

The tools, knowledge, and resources exist to resolve this crisis. What's needed now is the political will to act before Sri Lanka loses one of its greatest natural treasures forever. The choice is clear: implement science-based solutions now, or risk becoming known as the nation that chose to eliminate its elephants rather than learn to live alongside them.