The Uttar Pradesh Cricket Association (UPCA) is literally up to some monkey business. On Friday (September 27), it hired langurs in an effort to ward off food-grabbing monkeys at Kanpur’s historic Green Park Stadium, the venue for the second Test match between India and Bangladesh.
For decades, it has been common practice to deploy Indian grey langurs (Semnopithecus entellus) to combat rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). But why?
Matter of perception
Indians hold very different attitudes towards the two primate species, with rhesus monkeys treated with a lot more hostility than langurs. This is likely because, as research has shown, the former have shown greater propensity in urban spaces, and thus come into conflict with humans.
“Rhesus monkeys were engaged in significantly more feeding from human resources than langurs… only rhesus groups were recorded snatching food/stealing,” researchers Raghubir Singh Pirta, Madhav Gadgil, and A V Kharshikar, wrote in a 1995 paper which compared the status of th two species in Himachal Pradesh. On the other hand, “Although some langur groups inhabited towns… they were less habituated to humans… langurs are also considered as gentle creatures,” they wrote.
Langurs and rhesus monkeys are also often characterised as sworn enemies, with the latter believed to be scared of the black-faced, long-tailed primates. There is, however, no scientific evidence to back this claim. In fact, in natural settings, the two species are known to interact quite amicably.
In a 2012 paper, Michigan University researcher Ashish Nerlekar wrote that when feeding in their natural habitat, langur troops “do not object to the presence of” rhesus monkeys in the proximity. Nerlekar observed a rhesus monkey juvenile socialising and playing with an adult langur female in Madhya Pradesh’s Pench Tiger Reserve. Other researchers have also noted “significant play behaviour” between the two species, as well as instances of “inter-species grooming”.
Unethical, illegal practice
Using langurs to ward off rhesus monkeys is, thus, purely a product of Indians’ attitudes regarding the two species, and an enduring myth that they hate each other. It is not rooted in science.
But the practice remains in use because of what psychologists call “outcome bias” — evaluating a decision based purely on outcomes, rather than the merits of the decision itself. While it is true that langurs have proven to be effective against rhesus monkeys, this is not because of any innate qualities they themselves possess. For instance, there is no evidence that langurs’ larger size, black face, or long tails are scary for rhesus monkeys, as is commonly believed.
What makes langurs’ effective is their training, and rhesus monkeys’ general jumpy and nervous disposition (S D Singh & S N Manocha, “Reactions of the Rhesus Monkey and the Langur in Novel Situations”, 1966). And these primates have been effective enough for the practice to continue till date, despite serious ethical questions surrounding it.
Langurs that are captured to deal with the monkey menace are “torn apart from their families and habitat. Cramped in suffocating cages, tortured, and tamed — they are made to suffer,” an article on the website of conservation NGO Wildlife SOS said.
In 2012, the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) of the Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, imposed a ban on the use of langurs to scare off monkeys. Not that langurs did not already enjoy legal protection — they are protected under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Enforcement, however, has been lacking in most jurisdictions, leading to a state cricket association openly deploying langurs during an international cricket match.
Where authorities have chosen to follow the law, the likeness of the langur still remains their most potent weapon against rhesus monkeys. For instance, during last year’s G20 summit in New Delhi, municipal authorities used langur cutouts and impersonators — humans making langur calls.
Quick fix to bigger problem
Conservationists say that at best, the deployment of langurs is a temporary solution to a much larger problem.
Deforestation and urban expansion has greatly damaged monkey habitat. This has led to rhesus monkeys coming into more frequent contact with humans, whether it be in farmland or urban spaces. Their venerated status in Indian culture means that many people end up feeding them, while ineffective waste management in urban areas provides them with a steady source of food, and further incentive to settle around humans.
In the long term, this has led to conflict between humans and monkeys, who damage crops, take over urban spaces, and often attack humans. Monkey bites are the second most common animal bites in India (after dog bites), and account for as much as a fifth of all bite injuries. The Primate Research Centre in Jodhpur in 2015 estimated that India’s cities see about 1,000 monkey bites daily.
In this larger scheme of things, deploying langurs is simply ineffective to deal with the “monkey menace” at the scale at which the problem exists. Instead, conservationists advocate for better protection of their natural habitat, mass translocation measures, and curbs on feeding.