The Hindu Business Line : Joining the dots...

IN 2004-05, the Sariska and Kela Devi sanctuaries lost 24 tigers, while in Ranthambhore there was a drop of 21 tigers. All the seven tigers in the Palpurkano and all the six in Rani Durgawati sanctuaries in Madhya Pradesh have been wiped out. The decline in the North-East, including Namdhapa and Dampha tiger reserves, combined with the drop in number of tigers in the tiger reserves of Palamau, Valmiki, Dudhwa, Indrawati, Panna and Nagarjuna Sagar is evidence that none wants the fabulous cat to be around.

The state of the Forest Report, 2003, places forests having more than 70 per cent density at only 51,285 sq. km (1.56 per cent of the country's geographic area). In addition, an area of 26,245 sq. km (0.75 per cent of the nation's geographic area) of dense forests having more than 40 per cent density has been lost in just two years; of this, 26,245 sq. km of dense forests with an area of 23,140 sq. km lies in potentially rich tiger habitats and includes, among others, States such as Assam, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Uttranchal. These facts come from the detailed dissent note (including annexures) of Valmik Thapar, a member of the Task Force for Reviewing the Management of Tiger Reserves under the chairmanship of Sunita Narain.

The majority report can be said to be ambivalent on the critical issue of maintaining forests, especially sanctuaries and National Parks, as inviolate space for animals and birds. Arguing for some open space for tigers does not imply unconcern for other animals. If the tiger is not safe neither the forests nor its other denizens will be.

In the Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve, the tiger has become extinct in Kela Devi and Sawai Mansingh sanctuaries in 2005 and for Thapar the reason is the presence of 52,510 goats, 10,178 buffaloes, 4,928 cows and even 37 camels. Then there are 40 villages and their rising population. "One wonders whether this sanctuary has been declared to protect forest and wildlife or cattle? The long-term survival of tigers will, therefore, depend on how secure and inviolate are the protected areas in which they live," writes Thapar.

For naturalists (and this writer strongly backs them), the forests are for plants and animals and should remain so forever. But, for others, the population (mostly tribal) should be helped to share forest space as otherwise it would be unfair. But is it not most unfair to pack tribals forever in forests without giving them the option to lead better and useful lives outside? With some exceptions such as Periyar, the tribals have links with poachers based in cities outside and inside India. The tribals form the leading arm of poaching gangs killing tigers and the income earned (by the tribals) are not enough for a decent living.

Valmik Thapar makes a strong plea for a small percentage of forestland to be reserved for tigers. "A certain minimum area has to be managed exclusively in its natural form for the tiger. The area may be 0.5 per cent, one per cent or two per cent or more of the geographical area of this country depending on the political mandate to do so. ... A number of sanctuaries have been notified which include non-strategic areas of very low conservation value with many villages. A time-bound exercise of rationalising the boundaries of such sanctuaries should be undertaken by the Ministry of Environment and Forests in consultation with the States. This process will result in the exclusion of many areas. This will be of great help in mitigating the sufferings of a large number of people," writes Thapar, and he is not being unreasonable. That leaves about 98 per cent of India for tribals and all others. There is the cost of rehabilitation, which can be brought down, if the principle of Net Present Value of forestland is waived. In fact, there are many anti-poverty schemes run by the Centre, which could locate the tribals out of forests and get them started on new lives. "Alternatives where tigers have priority in identified protected reserves and people have priority outside them have to be explored fast and implemented expeditiously. There is no other way. The present concept of a new co-existence is an utopian idea and impractical and will not work. This, I am absolutely clear about. Blaming strict nature reserves and conservation laws where tigers have priority for all the poverty and inequity driven ills that plague our vast country is pointless polemics. These ills are consequences of the failure of development, economics and politics of the country and society as a whole and cannot be simple-mindedly blamed on conservationists," says an eloquent Thapar. Only next to human disturbance, are the mining and other projects approved by Orissa and Jharkhand. Most of these projects will provide employment and earn dollars today, while destroying forest cover forever and drying up rivers (forget tigers for a change). After the mines run out of bauxite and iron ore, the corporates will leave the place without a care for the forests and Orissa has some of the finest green cover. Apparently, the majority report of the Task Force will help push the Tribal Bill through the Parliament for the Congress party to win a few more votes. Will the forest ever chirp with birdsong or the tiger ever roar?

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Joining the dots...

Travel set to peak this weekend despite rain

Real Image plans to market digital cinema system in US

Cartoon

2 projects under Shiksha scheme