Caught in the wild, parties edgy over independent fronts in animal attack hotspots of 30 seats

Kozhikode: With 30 high-range Assembly constituencies poised to play a decisive role in the upcoming Kerala Assembly election, both the CPM-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) are scrambling to consolidate support in these crucial farmer-dominated regions. The Kerala Independent Farmers' Association (KIFA)’s announcement that it is considering fielding candidates in these constituencies has triggered intense political manoeuvring, as both fronts seek to safeguard their electoral prospects in what could determine the balance of power in the State.

KIFA has indicated that it is weighing contests in constituencies including Kanjangad, Irikkur, Peravoor, Mananthavady, Sulthan Bathery, Kalpetta, Thiruvambady, Perambra, Nadapuram, Nilambur, Vandur, Mannarkkad, Nenmara, Alathur, Kongad, Chalakudy, Chelakkara, Ollur, Kothamangalam, Muvattupuzha, Devikulam, Idukki, Peerumedu, Udumbanchola, Ranni, Konni, Poonjar, Punalur, Kottarakkara and Parassala.

Of these, the UDF currently holds eight seats — Irikkur, Peravoor, Sulthan Bathery, Kalpetta, Muvattupuzha, Kanjangad, Chalakudy and Mannarkkad — and must retain them while making further gains to form the next government. The LDF, on the other hand, needs to hold on to at least 22 of these constituencies to ensure another term in office.

A central issue shaping the political contest in these regions is the escalating human–wildlife conflict, which KIFA has projected as its primary campaign plank. According to data from the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, several human–wildlife conflict hotspots identified under the National Human Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Strategy and Action Plan are located in districts such as Wayanad, Ernakulam, Kannur, Kollam, Idukki, Palakkad and Thiruvananthapuram — many of which fall within the constituencies listed by KIFA.

In its manifesto, KIFA has put forward a series of demands, including a policy decision ensuring that no cases are registered against individuals who act in self-defence against wild animals entering revenue land and threatening life or property, citing provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act. The association has also sought extensive forest boundary management measures such as 100-metre-wide vista clearances along forest–revenue borders, construction of protective barriers, and systematic assessment and regulation of wild animal populations in accordance with forest carrying capacity.

Other demands include enhanced and time-bound compensation for victims of wild animal attacks and crop loss, permission for local consumption of wild boars culled under government orders, greater powers to local body presidents to order the killing of certain species, relocation of captured animals to zoos instead of re-release into forests, shoot-at-sight orders against dangerous animals through Executive Magistrates, and controlled traditional hunting rights for Adivasi communities.

While many of these proposals are considered difficult to implement in practical and legal terms, both political fronts appear cautious in responding. In an apparent attempt to address growing concerns among high-range farmers, the State Cabinet on February 11 announced the formation of a special team to devise measures for residents in forest-fringe areas.

KIFA chairman Alex Ozhukayil said senior leaders from both fronts, including LDF convener T P Ramakrishnan and KPCC president Sunny Joseph, have been in touch with the association. “Political leaders are frequently contacting us, urging us not to field candidates. UDF leaders have promised to address our demands if they come to power, while LDF leaders have highlighted welfare measures implemented during their tenure and outlined future plans. We are examining these responses and will take a final decision soon,” he said.

However, N Badusha, president of the Wayanad Nature Conservation Committee, criticised KIFA’s demands as unsuitable for a progressive society, warning that conceding to them without scientific backing could have far-reaching consequences. He suggested that the association’s electoral announcement appeared to be a bargaining tactic rather than a reflection of its real influence.

Meanwhile, the District Congress Committee (DCC) in Kannur maintained that voting patterns in its constituencies remain largely political and that farmers’ organisations have limited influence over electoral outcomes. “We do not think KIFA can bargain for its demands, as it has little influence in Kannur,” said DCC president Martin George. LDF convenor of Kozhikode Mukkam Muhammed also echoed the same view that KIFA or any other organisations which are active in high-range areas cannot influence the voters.

However, Joy Vettukuzhy, UDF convenor in Idukki, said the UDF leadership has agreed to consider KIFA’s demands while preparing its election manifesto. He expressed hope that the organisation would reconsider its decision to field candidates.

As talks continue behind the scenes, the high-range region has already turned into a key political battleground, where farmers’ issues and electoral calculations now go hand in hand — and the developments in the coming weeks could influence the decision of candidates of both fronts in assembly election.