India has not performed well in including the local impoverished communities while restoring its large carnivores, whether they are tigers, lions, or cheetahs. In Kuno, the government failed to acknowledge the presence of poachers, which led to the killing of a cheetah says Dr. Yadvendradev Vikramsinh Jhala, a key Indian wildlife scientist involved in the planning and scientific development of Project Cheetah, in an interview with TNIE on the recent killing of the first cheetah and the larger issues on the cheetah reintroduction programme.
Excerpts:
1. Does the shooting of KNG22 Cheetah represent an isolated act of poaching, or should we see it as a symptom of a larger failure to secure the landscape around Kuno?
Gun culture, snaring and bush-meat consumption has always been prevalent in this region around Kuno. When I began work in this landscape in 2006 there were only 3-4 chital per sq km. With inputs from good officers like J S Chauhan and subsequent Project Lion directors poaching was controlled and the chital population within the then Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary increased to over 50 chital per sq km by 2014 – rivalling that of the Gir Forests from where lions were to be reintroduced into Kuno. Unfortunately, the lions have yet to come. Once the MP Forest department realised that Gujarat was unlikely to part with their lions, management lapsed, poaching reappeared, and chital density dropped to current levels of below 18 chital per sq km. Leopards too were poached – their bones and body parts often substituted for the prised illegal tiger trade across the borders. The cheetahs were incidentally the best thing that could have happened to Kuno, if they were not reintroduced in Kuno then we would have lost not only the wildlife but also the habitat of Kuno – which is now a National Park almost double the size of the erstwhile Wildlife Sanctuary. So yes, if poaching could be controlled earlier, I do not see why now with added resources, man power, and political backing it is still operating in the landscape.
2. How could a radio-collared cheetah be shot despite being under regular monitoring? Is tracking an animal the same as being able to protect it?
Well that is one of the motives of monitoring i.e. protecting a cheetah when vulnerable. The satellite collars on the cheetahs can be remotely programmed to change their location frequency – so they could give locations every 30 minutes (or shorter if desired). When cheetahs pass through human dominated dangerous habitat the location frequency and satellite upload should be changed to < 1 hr; when cheetahs return to safe habitats like within a Protected Area the collar can be reprogrammed to record locations once or twice daily (to conserve collar batteries). All this can be and should be done within minutes by the Cheetah Project Director or delegated official using the mobile phone/computer access to the satellite programming of each cheetah collar. I have no idea if that was done or not.
3. TNIE was the first newspaper which broke the news of presence of poachers and large number of firearms among community in the Kuno region. After the report the government assured to drive a campaign to surrender arms. But no development so far. How do you see it?
I have authored the Action Plan for Cheetah Reintroduction in India (2021) as well as earlier reports on the feasibility of the Kuno Landscape for reintroducing cheetahs (2010). We have clearly documented presence of illegal arms, bush meat consumption, snaring and the dangers they pose, as well as which villages were most notorious and where police help should be sought to curtail poachers. These were the Government’s own reports which should have been heeded to and implemented.
4. Who should be held accountable for the safety of cheetahs once they move from a national park into territorial forests? Is this fundamentally a wildlife protection failure, a law-enforcement failure, or a failure of landscape-level conservation planning?
I believe that this question is best answered by the Cheetah Task Force, Chief Wildlife Warden Madhya Pradesh and the MoEFCC. However, in my opinion, losing a cheetah to a gunshot should not be considered a setback for the reintroduction project as this source of mortality was envisaged and accounted for in the Action Plan. What is of concern is being defensive about it; all concerned officials who work in the landscape know that there is poaching, by shoving it under the carpet we will never be able to address it. The lack of acknowledgement that poaching exists is the problem, this dangerous approach by managers precludes management actions, help from/collaboration with law enforcement agencies or resource allocation to address poaching. This allows poachers to flourish and the result is now obvious.
5. Do people living around Kuno see cheetahs as an asset or a potential threat to their livelihoods? Is compensation for livestock losses and other economic consequences adequate and timely? Can conservation succeed without meaningful community participation?
Living with cheetahs is easy compared to living with tigers, leopards or even wolves for that matter. There has been no recorded wild cheetah attack on humans. But yes, they would take small livestock and one should be cautious with small children. The Action Plan Spells out the importance of quick, transparent, market price, compensation for livestock kills. I do not know of the current mechanisms of how it is being implemented – but it is vital for promoting tolerance amongst local communities.
The real estate value around Kuno has increased between 10 to 100 fold after the cheetah reintroduction, so land owners are happy. However, poverty levels are high in the landscape and there are several landless labourers and tribals that live off forest resources. Gate revenues from tourism should be shared with this section of buffer zone communities, while forest department jobs and tourism related job opportunities given to those sharing their habitat with the cheetahs. India has not done so well in taking the local poor segment of communities along, while restoring it’s large carnivores – be it tigers, lions or cheetahs.
6. You have been associated with the scientific thinking around India's cheetah reintroduction. Looking back, what assumptions about habitat suitability, prey availability and human pressures have held up, and which need reconsideration?
Cheetahs were to serve as an umbrella and flagship for ecosystem restoration – this objective cannot be achieved from small fenced in cheetah populations. Only 15 cheetahs are currently free ranging while the rest are in fences. After four years of the reintroduction the numbers should have been reversed i.e. ~ 15 in bomas and 40 as free ranging. We can only have free ranging cheetahs if habitats are made safe from poachers and there is a good wild prey base (i.e. they are restored). Such habitats where free ranging cheetahs can survive would then benefit all of biodiversity – chital, blackbuck, chowsingha, caracal, hyena, wolf and many other vulnerable species. Such ecosystems would also provide ecosystem services like water/soil conservation, seed banks of native flora and viable populations of fauna. We are lagging far behind in restoring ecosystems for free ranging cheetahs.