India: Management and Conservation of Wildlife

MANAGEMENT & CONSERVATION OF WILDLIFE IN
K.N.PARK, SARISKA & RANTHAMBHORE RESERVES

Some Inputs : By Harsh Vardhan*

For the Empowered Committee On Forests & Wildlife Management
Constituted by the Hon. Chief Minister of Rajasthan
25 July 2005, Jaipur.

Rajasthan should be proud of the Wilderness Biodiversity Triangle constituted by Sariska, Ranthambhore and Keoladeo National Parks. The Department of Forest has struggled very hard to maintain their status in face of severe odds due to somewhat non-existent priority by the Government led by a political order rather anxious to cause ecological imbalance. My appreciation to all those in the Department, those retired and presently in service, who could discharge the expected roles, at times to the chagrin of the powers that be. The initiative of the Hon. Chief Minister, Ms. Vasundhara Raje is lauded for constituting a Committee to go into the issues which were hanging fire for long.

Detailed guidelines were issued by the Project Tiger Directorate during the 70s and early 80s about how a PT should be managed. Separate guidelines had been served by the MoEF on Wildlife Management (this author had served two MoEF panels that restructured the guidelines). It is hoped the Rajasthan Forest Department has such material in its possession. If they are put to use, there is hardly need for suggestions.

The main problem for the 3 Parks in question does originate from nowhere else but the Govt., of Rajasthan --- its lack of interest and absence of priority to their management related issues. Hence, the solution lies within the same Government. Time and again, numerous suggestions have been made. The crisis as witnessed during past few months is a cascading fall out of the issues not addressed appropriately. The three Parks received about 10.74 crore during 9th and 10th Plans, some non-plan allocation being additional. Nearly 95% was utilized.


1. KEOLADEO NATIONAL PARK :

The K.N. Park is probably the best visitor-friendly park in India, being supported by the stake-holders in a unique manner who receive numerous benefits out of the Park round the year. Therefore, it is an irony that such an ecosystem, tiny as it is, is made to face the odds leading towards its extinction, an issue that has been brought to the notice of the Government time and again - the forest authorities having remained generally complacent (all is well; no?.no?. your remarks are negative) for past almost fifteen years.

The main problems of KNP are :

(a) The State's indecisive stand towards providing flowing water to this Park of unique international repute. It can be tackled at a level it has been caused ie top leadership, who initiated the decision (5 September 04) which was thwarted by (her) own cabinet colleagues. It has been amply exemplified before the CEC of the Supreme Court and in its Report (11 March 05) to the Supreme Court.
(b) Invasive P. juliflora taking over the entire Park habitat as the indigenous species are exploited. It is possible to be tackled by provision of optimum flowing water, and manual-mechanical operations; the CEC of the Supreme Court made it clear (in one of the hearings) that permission would be issued for uprooting such species --- action needs to be initiated.
(c) Poaching, which the authorities know how best to curb.

2. SARISKA :

The Park has been driven to its present status mainly because of continued lack of governance (for nearly ten years), as per given directions, by the forest officials, remarkably the Field Directors; they did not take active interest in issues which were/are crucial for successful management; they left them over to the lower level functionaries who were seldom supervised, supported and encouraged. Responsibility should be fixed. The extinction of the Sariska Tiger has taken place at a time the prey base was/is not missing and the habitat was receptive even though it was mutilated by excessive human interference. Sariska is a classic example of the failure on the part of the State; its revenue agencies, police system should equally be put responsible to share the blame for this.

Suggestions : Removal of villages (initiated in 1976 but failed by Govt., itself), and reintroduction of Tigers can be initiated to try and accept a major challenge in concurrent history of tiger conservation in the country. This, however, needs to be preceded by a (minimum) long term perspective project (can be for 20 years), which, for timely success, ought to induct private sector into the its implementation; modalities are possible to be worked out. Scope, time and opportunity are waiting for the present State leadership to take a decision --- crowning glory of a Park to be revived. And it is visible possibility.

3. RANTHAMBHORE :

The issues at stake are well pronounced for Ranthambhore Park. Some are:

a) Social Aspects :

i) All the PTs made a start as though at a fault-line : suddenly banging the doors for the communities settled since ages around the periphery of the designated forest areas. Hence the eventual conflict. It continues to this day. It was most accentuated in Ranthambhor PT where the forest administration acted in such a tiger-centric, albeit self-centred, manner that its misbehaviour with village community became the order of the day. It led to conflicts, skirmishes etc and even the then Field Director, an NGO (WWF) official, and a senior police official were beaten up by villagers. The Uliana village is a classic example, made hostile by none but the Government functionaries --- the forest, the revenue and the police. Other PTs in the country do not face such stiff resistance as is at Ranthambhor. The reasons are not buried under the grass at Raj Bagh! .
The solution : Initiate participation of local level stake-holders and most problems will get resolved --- the present day somewhat evasive attitude (of foresters) shall have to be shed. Develop Uliana as a success-story and do not run away from this village.

(ii) The Eco Development Programme at Ranthambhor is another example : it was
executed, if it was, unmindful of the basic needs of villagers. A golden opportunity has been lost (by foresters) probably because additional management-capacity had not been developed.

iii) Village pastures around Ranthambhore are put to uses other than raising grass. It has caused severe problems to people leaving them with no choice except grazing inside the tiger park. The revenue officials, albeit the State Government, are responsible for this neglect of India's ancient practice of maintaining the pasture-ecosystem. Some land is still available and can be re-juvenated to control the grazing pressure; an exercise better to be organised through the rural development department and the district administration, to be monitored by the forest authorities.
Note : There is increasing emphasis on agriculture by the village community. The
grassland development can be a new mechanism of growth so that the bovine economy gets a deserved new fillip (refer the Rajasthan Forest Department's initiative to organise a Workshop on Grassland Ecology & Gene pool Conservation during end September 05)..

b) Management :

i) The (somewhat conflicting) role of CF and DFO shall have to be redefined --- to remark the least about how the tiger is suffering from petty issues between the two. A new system needs to be enforced in an effective manner (see how the police and revenue officials function though they are generally blamed). A whole chapter can be done on such issues.; role of lower staff, monitoring their daily beats followed up by action at appropriate level, repositioning of existing Chowkies (should be on the periphery and not inside) with wider wireless hook up, giving them basic facilities (mobikes), training, encouragement, new recruitment from stake-holders' community etc --- the private agencies are willing to provide inputs and forest officials need not feel shy to acknowledge them and can attribute their by-line.

ii) Close cooperation with the revenue agencies is essential for the
over all success of management as several issues can be sorted out smoothly through meetings with Collector, ADM, SP etc, in particular about grazing, and fuel wood .

iii) What is Core and what is Buffer area? What is Tourism Zone? Several PTs (Corbett, Kanha, Nagarhole, Periyar, Kaziranga, Sariska etc) have more than one entry points. Ranthambhore should be opened at Bodal, Khandar, Bhuri Pahadi etc. The gains shall be astounding --- tourism getting dispersed and more information received from them by the Park authorities (provided they are willing to have it).

iv) Corridor Relocation is a major issue but it has hardly been initiated. The survival of Tiger is linked to this exercise in which the revenue agencies are to be associated. It is established beyond doubt that tigers walk away from Ranthambhore up to 200 km (one found dead (15 July 03) in a train accident in Kota, a Tigress with two cubs found in Bund Baretha (2000) and the one cub settled in K.N. Park; there can be more examples but unrecorded so far). Some measures introduced in Ranthambhore during past one year (Sawai Mansingh Sanctuary) deserve appreciation of the present staff.

v) Moratorium for some years on the overseas/domestic film producers at least at Ranthambhor (and at Bandhavgarh and Kanha). They have over marketed these PTs. The film producers are initially permitted by MoEF (a certain pressure group operates). After this, it is mere formality with CWLW. MoEF should ask film crews to go to lesser known PTs
and Sanctuaries to shoot their biodiversity and highlight it so that the dormant green regimes are put to prominence and revenue is generated in new parks.

vi) Having faced what has happened inside the PTs (Sariska being an example), it is time the park management realizes that poaching can best be curbed by way of developing an active, continuous and meaningful rapport with the police. The anti-poaching exercise at MoEF is like mono-culture with (a retired) forest official manning the job of tiger-patrol with hardly any staff at Delhi or country level. The suggestion (at National WL Board level) for a National Bureau for Curbing Poaching is apparently caught in procedural wrangling. Rajasthan can demonstrate its present leadership by constituting a police-cum-forest mechanism to tap information at village level about the suspect-characters (who are omnipresent all around), classify the data, prepare a PT level dossier and systematically thrash out such elements --- poaching of the prey base is continuing which shall shortly prove suicidal for the predator. The scope is loud and clear, success.

vii) Audit of the Park's Management should be initiated to iron out issues which seem to be impossible to be tackled within the present system and improve the working. NGOs will need to bear the responsibility.

viii) A Management Committee should be set up comprising forest officials and local stake holders to run the Park as a unique conservation model, make it visitor-friendly, and offer benefits to stake holders.

ix) A Tourism Policy is called for at this Park to address to the needs of visitors who have no say and none to listen to their woes. The Park has been made a highly tourism-centric place yet it has no such policy.

c) SCIENTIFIC :

The scope is limitless for scientific experiments in the PT in question. Past experiences clearly indicate that the research can not be carried out entirely by the forest officials as they have other jobs weighing a bit too much. They can, as they so much intend to, be part of the research mechanism. WII and some private agencies have proven expertise in this realm and be accepted. Aversion to NGOs and to the overseas collaboration are making the forestry, nay wildlife, sector poorer (see OUTLOOK magazine 11 July issue). All the manufacturing and service sectors in India have been opened up to private captains within past ten years barring forestry and WL....? Huge scope exists for such activities to bag new investment worth crores of Rs annually in PTs alone; to roll out hundreds of young scholars into different disciplines where the nation is facing vacuum today. Again a case for Rajasthan to take appropriate lead.
Note: A (known) local NGO at Ranthambhore is being given cold shouldered treatment, it can be absorbed within the park's decision making process?.?

4. POLICY :

A policy for plantations shall have to be coined : private plantations to
produce wood and grass! When cloth or TV or Mobile phones can be made in
India's private sector, what stops the nation's decision makers from having fuel wood produced in private sector, or grass grown in this sector? To ensure welfare of PTs, such a step is necessary. Else, forget tigers in the next few years.

Source: Harsh Vardhan - contact

Link: India Offers Reward to Track Down Tiger Poachers
Link: Project Tiger: India rejects US proposal


Other EVANA-articles about this topic:
On World Environment Day* Harsh Vardhan talks about the Bishnois, the world's first ecologists (en)

India: Ranthambhore Project Tiger (en)

India: Grassland ecology and gene poll - a background note (en)

Diclofenac: A new environmental poison in South Asia (en)