Why Wild Animals Attack Humans And What Makes One A Man Eater

A BBC Future report examining why wild animals attack humans notes that such encounters can have different triggers, including animals defending themselves or their young, protecting territory, or responding to perceived threats.

Agreeing, wildlife photographer and environmentalist Indrajit Ghorpade says it is important to distinguish between an animal that has attacked a human and a genuine “man-eater”. According to him, the latter refers to an animal that repeatedly preys on humans as part of its behaviour, rather than an isolated incident.

“Man-eating animals are individuals that prey on humans as a pattern of their behaviour,” Ghorpade explains.

He says several factors can drive such abnormal behaviour. Injury or illness, loss of natural prey and increasing interaction with human settlements can all play a role.

One historical example is the Champawat tiger, which was reported to have killed hundreds of people before being shot by hunter and conservationist Jim Corbett. Ghorpade notes that the tiger was found to have lost its upper and lower canines, which would have made hunting its natural prey difficult.

“Thus unable to hunt natural prey. And depended on humans for food,” he tells indianexpress.com. However, not every animal that kills a person should be classified as a man-eater.

Ghorpade points out that scavenging on human corpses, isolated attacks and incidents involving self-defence should not automatically be described as man-eating behaviour.

“There are many reasons that they are wrongly labelled maneaters. Like man-animal conflict, human dominated landscapes, loss of prey, injury or sickness,” he says.

This distinction matters because wild animals can attack humans without developing a pattern of hunting them for food. A leopard defending itself, a bear surprised at close range or a crocodile attacking near a riverbank may all be dangerous situations, but they do not necessarily indicate that the animal has become a habitual predator of humans.

There is no single response that can apply to every human-wildlife conflict. Ghorpade says such cases should be assessed individually.

“They must be handled on a case-to-case basis. And killing them should be the last resort,” he says. Where an animal repeatedly targets humans and poses an ongoing danger to people and settlements, authorities may need to intervene. But determining whether an animal is actually exhibiting habitual man-eating behaviour is important before taking such a step.

Ultimately, the presence of a dangerous animal does not necessarily mean that wildlife is deliberately targeting humans. Understanding why an attack occurred, whether it was defensive or predatory, and whether there is a repeated pattern can help distinguish genuine man-eaters from animals caught in increasingly frequent human-wildlife encounters.