A controversial proposal in Sri Lanka to establish a large-scale monkey detention centre as a response to the country’s growing Human-Monkey Conflict has ignited sharp criticism from environmentalists and scientists, while wildlife authorities have distanced themselves from the initiative and questioned its long-term viability.
The pilot project reportedly envisions a 150-acre facility near the Kalu Ganga Reservoir in the Matale District, aimed at relocating monkeys from urban and agricultural zones where they have increasingly clashed with human populations. The objective is to manage and reduce disruptive monkey numbers, but officials say the proposal did not originate from the Department of Wildlife Conservation.
Director General Ranjan Marasinghe stated that while the department may provide technical assistance such as veterinary care or tranquilising animals if requested, the concept itself was initiated at the district level and is not part of the agency’s current action plan or budget. He emphasized that any project of this magnitude would require clearance from the National Planning Department and must secure independent funding and formal approvals before moving forward.
Marasinghe noted that the toque macaque, the species most often involved in conflicts, is not legally classified as protected wildlife in Sri Lanka. As a result, qualified personnel outside the wildlife department may conduct capture operations provided authorities are notified. However, he cautioned that removing individual troops would not solve the broader issue if environmental conditions that attract monkeys—such as poor waste management and easy food access—remain unchanged.
Environmental advocates have voiced strong opposition to the plan. Centre for Environmental Justice Chairman Hemantha Withanage questioned both the practicality and the behavioural implications of confining wild primates, warning that the territorial and hierarchical nature of monkey troops could lead to aggression, injuries, and deaths if animals were forced into close quarters without complex management systems.
Adding a scientific perspective, veteran primatologist Wolfgang Dittus described the idea as well-intentioned but fundamentally flawed. Drawing on nearly six decades of research on Sri Lankan primates, he argued that detention centres fail to address the true driver of the conflict: abundant human-generated food sources, including garbage, crop exposure, and intentional feeding at religious and tourist sites. According to Dittus, international experience shows that education, waste control, and crop-protection measures are far more effective in reducing human-wildlife clashes.
He also questioned the ecological feasibility of the proposed site, estimating that a forested area of that size could naturally sustain only 60 to 100 monkeys. Any attempt to hold larger populations would require continuous artificial feeding, raising costs and potentially worsening dependency. Comparable facilities in countries such as Malaysia, he noted, were designed primarily for conservation and research rather than population suppression or conflict mitigation.
Dittus further praised Sri Lanka’s earlier refusal to approve the export of large numbers of endemic macaques to China, calling it a decision aligned with conservation priorities rather than short-term management tactics.
Meanwhile, Matale District Secretary Prasanna Madanayake said there have been no recent discussions or developments related to the proposal since mid-last year, leaving the project’s future uncertain as debate continues over whether behavioural change among humans, rather than confinement of wildlife, offers the only sustainable solution to the escalating conflict.
