Diplomatic no more

 

 

There are two tigers in Panna, according to Wildlife Institute of India at Dehradun. There are 22 tigers in Panna Tiger Reserve, claims Madhya Pradesh government. While official estimates – both – can’t seem to agree on that count, Kumkum Dasgupta, on a travel website Ghumakkar.com, recounts her own experience to conclude this: “I didn’t see any tiger; I did not hope to see any, anyway.” Obviously, the conservation math has gone horribly wrong.

Raghu Chundawat, eminent tiger expert, who had first blown the whistle on Panna in his report ‘Missing Tigers in Panna’ in 2005 tells TSI, “Forget about action on the report, the government registered six-seven cases against me. As if this was not enough, they even required me to recover the expenses on the report… During my last trip to Panna, forest officials enquired about the possibility of bringing a tigress from Bandhavgarh in for breeding. If there are indeed 22 tigers; then what is the need to bring a tigress from outside?”

Conservation of Asiatic Lion, too, has taken political overtones in Gujarat. Local administration and the locals are not in favour of relocation of the lions – ‘the pride of Gujarat’ – from Gir to Kuno Wildlife Park in Madhya Pradesh. Faiyaz Khudsar, conservation scientist, involved in the relocation project, had opined, “The attachment is understandable, but from an ecological point of view, relocation is very important for the Asiatic Lion’s long-term survival… any forest calamity or disease breakout could wipe out their entire population.” His worst fears were nearly proven when fire broke out in Gir forest recently. Though most of the population survived, the lions may not be lucky every time. On the other extreme, in Kaziranga, rhinos from Kaziranga sanctuary in Assam were airlifted and transported to Dudhwa National Park in 1978 despite local opposition, and the project proved successful.

Khudsar explains this further, “If the government accepts that there is no tiger in Sariska or Panna, it will have devastating impact on tourism.” The prospect also seems to explain the resistance to the relocation of Asiatic lions. Besides, as Raghu Chundawat points out, “The Madhya Pradesh forest officials have hardly bothered to communicate with their Gujarat counterparts on various aspects to do with relocation. Then why will Gujarat co- operate?”

Instances of the state’s engagement with conservation have come about in ways good and bad. When it became clear that there were no more tigers in Sariska, the then chief minister Vasundhara Raje had called for bringing in a couple of cats to the forest posthaste, reportedly to stay ahead of the mining lobby – one ever grudging of Sariska’s tiger reserve status. On the other hand, in Bandhavgarh National Park, a conservationist revealed to TSI on conditions of anonymity, when a tigress preyed on a cow, local people demanded she be slain. To complicate matters, local politicians stood up in support of the people. The pressure mounted to such an extent that the Chief Wildlife Warden had to get the tigress sent away to a zoo to save her life! Man-animal conflict, and rehabilitation of forest communities are in fact the major points of contention in conservation efforts, dividing conservationists into two lobbies. In the first are scientists like Valmik Thapar who believe that tiger-tribal co-existence is a farce and scientifically impossible. The second group consists of the likes of Sunita Narain and Madhu Sarin who firmly advocate tribal rights on forests. “It is not the tribes who are killing elephants or tigers”, says Madhu Sarin. “The reason for their dwindling number is poaching and deforestation. Tigers and the tribal population have lived together for centuries without a problem.” The Forest Rights Act implemented with effect from January 1, 2008 notified Critical Wildlife Habitats in forest areas without thinking it necessary to involve the forest communities, and even included some absurd clauses as having to produce paperwork towards residential proof.

Ritwik Datta, renowned environmental lawyer hits out at government policies, “In the quest for rapid industrial growth, government compromises on the health of environment… The government has constituted EAC (Environmental Assessment Committee) under Ministry of Environment and Forests whose job is to conduct industrial project appraisal. But it hardly rejected 0.5 per cent of total projects.” Vehemently criticising the modus operandi of EAC he further adds, “How can it be possible to approve 22 projects in a day?” Recently, EAC had gone to Arunachal Pradesh for a hearing pertaining to the much criticised Dibang Dam project. Much to the chagrin of the locals, the hearing venue was decided at a place which was 100 kilometers away from the place in question. Little wonder hardly anybody turned up before the Committee.

To oversee the conservation projects, SC has constituted the Central Empowered Committee. One of the members of the Committee, preferring anonymity, told TSI, “Be it WII or CMPDI (Central Mine Planning & Design Institute), most of their reports are nothing but a bundle of lies. Many a time, we object to a particular project, only to know it was approved later.” Dismissing the Tiger Task Force he says, “They are all nothing but drawing-room conservationists.”

For yet another example of acute condescension for wildlife by the state, one needn’t look further than Etawah in Uttar Pradesh, home-district of former CM Mulayam Singh Yadav, and also home to the largest population of Saras Cranes. That is, until the CM’s helipad project in Safai, Etawah, destroyed the natural habitat of the bird. As long as the powers that be are only interested in vote bank politics, there is little hope for our disenfranchised species…