
Monkey intruders in Singapore: Here's how to stay one step ahead of them
Residents Pankaj Kumar and Alka Verma had the wing mirrors on their car stolen twice. That cost them between S$200 and S$300. It also happened to their neighbours and even a visitor.
'One day, a guest's car was just here, and … by the time I rushed to the car, both mirrors were gone,' recounted Verma.
The married couple now hand out mirror covers to their guests who park in the estate, which is made up of mainly landed homes.
Their household was one of five that reached out to the programme Talking Point after repeated monkey intrusions. 'You're looking at the monkeys, and they're on the top of the trees, laughing at you with the mirrors,' said Kumar.
'It's not only the case with us. Most of our neighbours have faced issues of monkeys taking away vitamins or cosmetics.'
Verma recalled a monkey swiping a computer mouse from her house. 'They're very aggressive,' she said.
Another resident, Robin Lo, said monkeys were even pulling windshield wipers off cars. Many households now keep their windows and doors closed for most of the day, according to Toh Ai Ling. 'We're imprisoned in our own homes.'
These residents are not alone in 'having to bear' with this monkey business.
Compared to a decade ago, the government logged a 35 per cent jump in monkey-related feedback to about 2,500 cases annually between 2017 and 2023. Many of the incidents, including intrusions, attacks and feeding issues, involved Singapore's native long-tailed macaques.
Talking Point finds out why these macaques are venturing into residential estates more than ever — where anything from snacks to shiny objects might be fair game for them — and what residents can do to stay one step ahead.
FOREST FORAGERS TURNED URBAN EXPLORERS
Long-tailed macaques are highly intelligent, social animals that forage in close-knit troops and are known to be territorial.
These omnivores eat just about everything, including insects, fruit, scraps and small animals. Adults, especially males, can inflict serious wounds with their sharp canines when provoked.
With urbanisation continuing to break up and shrink Singapore's remaining patches of forest, the monkeys' movements are increasingly bringing them into contact and, as likely as not, conflict with people.
'If you look at satellite imagery from just a decade ago, a lot of forests have been lost,' said Kalaivanan Balakrishnan, chief executive officer of the Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (ACRES).
The monkeys have 'no choice but to pass by our urban areas', added ACRES senior wildlife coordinator Karina Lim.
And they have adapted to urban life. Besides scaling high-rise blocks to raid kitchens, they also target plastic bags, such as those used for food deliveries.
'Macaques have learnt that that's where the food will be,' said Lim, who handles an average of 23 monkey-related hotline calls a month. 'They've learnt how to open all these parcels … to see if they can find anything of value.'
Then there are people who feed monkeys, which conditions the animals to further associate humans with food. This, in turn, reduces their inclination to forage in the forest, according to the National Parks Board (NParks), which manages human-wildlife conflict.
Most of the feeders tend to be from the older generation, 'who may feel empathetic towards the animals', said Kalaivanan.
While ACRES has reached out to feeders, enforcement must also be stepped up, he urged. 'Generally, they'll be like, 'I don't care. I'm just going to continue feeding (monkeys).''
Human-monkey encounters were once common only near nature reserves and catchment areas, like in Bukit Timah and Upper Thomson. But the numbers are climbing island-wide now.
At the northeastern corner of Singapore, public safety concerns led the authorities to trap 50 monkeys in Punggol last year.
The majority were sterilised. But their relocation to Coney Island — where there is insufficient food for them, said Kalaivanan — has not proved successful. Instead, they keep returning to Punggol.
Andie Ang, who heads Mandai Nature's primate conservation and Singapore programmes, said there is no guarantee that measures such as relocation can work.
'The monkeys are going to a new environment where there could be other monkeys. … They might have fights,' she said. As for sterilisation, it would 'take a long time' to see its effect on the population.
Finally, culling, which is considered a last resort when monkeys are aggressive and unsuitable for relocation, could also backfire. Removing monkeys makes it easier for other competing monkeys to move into that territory later.
'Culling doesn't solve the problem,' said Ang. 'The residents might not be happy after a while, when they see that the monkeys are (still around).'
MANAGING MONKEY MISCHIEF
Since Singapore cannot be rid of monkeys, there are other efforts underway to keep them at bay, including steps that residents, too, can take.
When it comes to protecting your home from intrusions, the first thing is to keep food out of sight of the monkeys.
NParks has rolled out monkey-proof bins in some hotspots to minimise access to food outdoors. These are bins with weighted lids, which can also be opened by stepping on a pedal — and which are too heavy to open for macaques.
Those who own landed property can secure their own bins using bungee cords.
NParks officers also patrol the edges of forested areas, using tools such as laser pointers to startle the macaques and drive them back into their natural habitat.
But these creatures can 'get used to' these deterrents, said NParks' wildlife management and outreach director, Cyrena Lin. So the officers must vary their tactics.
To boost the monkeys' natural food sources and reduce their need to forage in residential areas, NParks has planted more fruit trees on Coney Island.
Then there are community-led efforts like the Monkey Guards programme run by the Jane Goodall Institute (Singapore). Besides educating people about macaques and the importance of not feeding them, its volunteers are trained to patrol residential areas and deter monkeys.
'We use tools, sticks or use (our) voice, our height, our size,' cited Monkey Guards programme lead Sabrina Jabbar, to 'push' the monkeys to other places, for example back into their forest.
For members of the public who encounter monkeys, there are warning signs if the animals feel threatened. They will bare their teeth, shriek or make what Jabbar calls 'fake lunges'.
'They'll run towards you, they'll stop right in front of your feet, … then they'll reverse,' she said. 'If you stand your ground, they'll notice that it's not working.'
She also recommends finding safety in numbers. 'Let's say you're walking on your own, you don't feel comfortable, and there are people around you, just join them,' she said. '(With) more people, the macaques will just move away.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Independent Singapore
6 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
‘I paid $8 for these!': Man warns others about vendor selling overpriced ice cream with no price displayed
SINGAPORE: A man took to social media to warn others about the vendor stationed near Tampines MRT station who allegedly sells overpriced ice cream. In a post on the COMPLAINT SINGAPORE Facebook group, Facebook user Syukuri Apa Yang Telat Ad claimed he was charged S$8 for two ice creams—one served in a cone and the other as an ice cream sandwich. He also mentioned that he only found out about the price after the vendor had already handed him the two ice creams. 'I asked the uncle three times, '$8?!' [but he kept insisting it's because] they're big size now. Last time, the ice cream cone was not so big,' he wrote. He added that there was no price indicated anywhere on the cart, and that he would not have bought the ice cream if he had known the price beforehand. 'Think I was being ripped off, but since he was an uncle I did not make a big hooha. Told him it's not right to do this, but he stood his ground so I paid anyway,' he said. 'Just putting it here in hopes that people do not take it for granted (like I did) and ask for the price before buying.' 'Daylight robbery!' In the comments, many said they recognised the vendor and wrote that he is indeed notorious for charging steep prices for his ice cream. One netizen shared, 'This uncle is infamous for charging high prices. At one point he was selling outside my sons' school. I heard parents complained about him charging high prices to unsuspecting primary school students. So he moved away I guess. I think many Tampines residents recognise his face and will never buy from him.' Another commented, 'Daylight robbery! This is in Tampines. I was also charged $8… I was shocked too… if I get McDonald's ice cream a few metres away, it is way cheaper…' A third shared, 'I had confronted him before and he claimed his ice cream slice are thicker than others. I've stopped buying from him since then.' Meanwhile, a fourth netizen offered a different viewpoint, writing, 'I feel if you ask the price and don't agree with it, then don't buy. Some people will be okay with it. That's his strategy. At the end of the day, if everyone feels it's too expensive, then nobody will buy from him, and he will suffer. But it's good that this was brought up.' In other news, a young Singaporean took to social media to share her frustration with her parents' lack of concern for her health, revealing that she had been fed unhealthy food for years and was dismissed when she raised concerns about her medical condition. In a post on r/askSingapore, the local recounted how her parents would regularly serve dishes such as Hokkien mee, char kway teow, and mee goreng 'three times a day for multiple days in a row' or even 'the same pizza for all meals across three days.' 'When I was young, of course, I had no idea what was good and what was bad, so I had no choice but to go with it,' she wrote. Read more: Singaporean woman says her parents fed her hawker food daily for years; she's now battling severe high cholesterol


CNA
10 hours ago
- CNA
SAF regular serviceman dies after being found unconscious at Hendon Camp swimming pool
SINGAPORE: A Singapore Armed Forces regular serviceman has died after he was found unconscious at Hendon Camp swimming pool, said the Ministry of Defence (Mindef) in a news release on Saturday (Aug 9). He was discovered at 7.15am on Saturday, and appeared to have been training on his own, added Mindef. "CPR and AED were administered immediately. The Singapore Police Force and Singapore Civil Defence Force were activated, and the serviceman was evacuated to Changi General Hospital via SCDF ambulance," the release read. "Resuscitation continued on route and upon arrival at Changi General Hospital. Despite resuscitation efforts, he was pronounced dead at 7.44am. "The Ministry of Defence and the SAF extend their deepest condolences to the family of the late serviceman." Mindef said it is providing assistance to the family.


CNA
a day ago
- CNA
Chief Justice names law graduate who wanted to remain anonymous after plagiarism in exams
SINGAPORE: A law graduate who sought anonymity after being denied admission to the Bar for failing to disclose past plagiarism incidents has been named by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon. The Chief Justice on Thursday (Aug 7) chose to republish his grounds of decision and identify Ms Pulara Devminie Somachandra. "I make this order because, in my judgment, the principle of open justice is the predominant and overriding interest in this case, and there are insufficient grounds for departing from it," he said in his judgment. 'The principle of open justice entails, as a general rule, that the identities of the parties are made known to the public and anonymisation orders are a derogation from this principle,' he added. Ms Somachandra had plagiarised in the Part A Bar examinations in 2020 and on occasion in university, but had failed to disclose these offences when applying for admission to the Bar. She was not admitted to the Bar and a five-year minimum exclusionary period was imposed. She had requested her identity be kept anonymous in the original grounds of decision. The law graduate had produced a medical note from a private doctor stating that she had suicidal thoughts, and said a non-anonymised judgment posed an immediate risk to her health and safety. Chief Justice Menon then released his grounds of decision with Ms Somachandra's identity temporarily withheld on an interim basis, pending a psychiatric report from the Institute of Mental Health (IMH). The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) and the Singapore Institute of Legal Education (SILE) argued that the grounds of decision should not continue to be anonymised. Meanwhile, the Law Society proposed that Ms Somachandra undergo a period of consistent psychological and psychiatric treatment at IMH, as well as to create a risk management plan. In the meantime, the anonymisation should remain in force until she reapplies for admission after the minimum exclusionary period. Ms Somachandra argued that she should continue to be kept anonymous for several reasons. Among them, she said that the lifting of the anonymisation would mean her past conduct would "come back to haunt her, regardless of the progress she has made or may hope to make". INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE Chief Justice Menon said the default rule that the identities of lawyers must be made public is of "great importance", as questions of public interest regarding the character of the lawyer are required for admission to the Bar. These proceedings, which are open and public, also signal to the public that those who are admitted have been publicly assessed as "morally competent" to meet the high standards expected of members of the legal profession. If the publication of an applicant's name is sought to be withheld, it would typically only be warranted if it is required to "avert an imminent and credible threat of real harm". Calling it a high threshold, Chief Justice Menon said the harm must be grave and disproportionate when weighed against the interest of open justice. 'There is insufficient evidence to suggest that there is a substantial risk that Ms Somachandra's condition will likely deteriorate to such an extent that it would be a disproportionate consequence of lifting the anonymisation of the (grounds of decision),' he said. The facts, considered with her stated willingness to undergo treatment, "fall short of establishing an imminent and credible risk of grave and disproportionate harm to Ms Somachandra if the anonymisation" was lifted, he added. With regards to her argument that her past conduct would 'come back to haunt her', Chief Justice Menon said those who seek to be admitted to the Bar must put their character up for public scrutiny. "Moreover, it is contrary to the notion of repentance and rehabilitation for Ms Somachandra to now seek to sweep her past misconduct under the rug," he said. "While second chances ought to be given, the journey to repentance, rehabilitation and reintegration begins with the willingness to confront and to be honest and open about her past misconduct." He emphasised that information about a legal practitioner's character is 'even more important' given the ethical standards to which legal practitioners are held. The Chief Justice also said he was unpersuaded by the Law Society's proposal that the court should revisit the issue of anonymisation only if and when Ms Somachandra decides to reapply for admission to the Bar at the end of her minimum exclusionary period. It is 'quite arguable' that matters may be made worse since the fear of having her name published would hang over her for the next few years, he said. The court should also "not have to police" whether she has made progress in her recovery over the next five years or so, he added. "There must be some personal responsibility and willingness on Ms Somachandra's part to take steps towards her rehabilitation," said Chief Justice Menon. PLAGIARISM Ms Somachandra graduated from a university in the United Kingdom in 2019. To practise law in Singapore, law graduates must be admitted to the Bar by passing a set of exams known as Part B. Law graduates from approved overseas universities must also take another conversion examination known as Part A. After failing two papers in the Part A exam in 2020, she resat the exam, but some of her answer scripts were found to be similar to another candidate's, Ms Tan, with matching texts. The SILE concluded that she had collaborated with Ms Tan. Ms Somachandra eventually passed the Part A exam in 2022 and the Part B exam the following year. She applied to be admitted to the Bar but failed to disclose the incident in 2020 with the Part A exam. In 2024, the AGC contacted her university, and after Ms Somachandra consented for the information to be released, it stated that "moderate plagiarism" had occurred.