The Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act, 2021, was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 17 December 2021. The Bill mainly rationalises the Schedules of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (WLPA), and aims to implement the provisions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
Another important addition is the regulation of the import, trade, possession or proliferation of invasive species. A response to the Bill has been invited from the general public.
The 1972 Act provides for the safeguarding of listed flora and fauna and for establishing a network of ecologically important protected areas. A number of amendments have been made in it and overall, there has been an encouraging outcome of the implementation of the Act.
The tigers (a flagship species) in India account for about 70% of the world’s tiger population in the wild. There are 53 tiger reserves in India. The extent of forest cover in tiger reserves is an important indicator of the health of the forest ecosystems. We also have a network of 106 national parks and 564 wildlife sanctuaries. A healthy network of wildlife habitats is in fact a network of ecosystem service providers.
In spite of successes and achievements on many fronts, there are some areas that require more attention. With the improvement in wildlife habitats and the spreading of human population, the issue of human-wildlife conflict needs continuous special attention.
There has been remarkable capacity-building of the forest department in dealing with emergency situations when a wild animal is in danger or when it has strayed into a human habitation, putting both the animal and people around at risk. But the issue of crop damage by wild animals requires some more concrete steps.
In the 25 February 2022 issue of this newspaper, an article entitled Rethinking wildlife protection strategy by Mr Madhav Gadgil, an environmentalist, was published. He has vehemently criticised the WLPA and quickly jumped to the conclusion that people should be allowed to hunt wild animals for trophy and trade. It would be worthwhile to go over some of the sweeping and rather irresponsible statements that should not have come from an environmentalist of national repute—
“…a senior police officer and a High Court judge have told me that WLPA is constitutionally invalid.”
“Indeed, using the weapon of WLPA, a tyrannical regime controlled by the forest departments, has come to prevail all over the country.”
“They (the people) may cull monkeys, hygienically pack the meat and sell it to China or Afrikans.”
Instead of suggesting any practical wildlife protection strategy, throughout the article Mr Gadgil has proposed sport hunting as if wildlife management is nothing else and it would solve all managerial issues. It has been mentioned that Britain has shooting estates where as many as 12,300 wild animals and birds are killed every day. Mr Gadgil misses the point that Britain has lost almost all its natural forests and wildlife.
It has become a fashion to propose unpragmatic forest management strategies by frequently using the word ‘people’. People’s participation is essential, but it does not mean chaos. People’s participation is a mosaic of roles and has to be coupled with suitable regulations for a noble purpose so that there is both short- and long-term well-being of the citizens, especially those of communities who depend on forests for their livelihood.
Although there is talk of people’s participation, the hidden intention often is to create a situation where the government loses its control over natural resources so that forests and ecosystems may ultimately land into the hands of commercial forces. These issues have been dealt with in detail in my books, The Crisis of the Tiger: Is there a Way Out? and The Dilemma of People’s Participation.
If the WLPA is being amended, it should also incorporate the burning issues of human wildlife conflict and well-being of the people. The proposed Act should explicitly spell out the principles of Wildlife Management, which may include:
1. Forests and wildlife habitats have developed to the present stage through a complex biological process over hundreds of years. They are to be managed as living ecosystems keeping in mind that all its components are interdependent and have their own ecological value.
2. The habitats should be managed primarily for the ecosystem services (including climate change mitigation) they are providing to human beings. The tangible benefits from the forests are only a small portion of the intangible benefits in the form of ecosystem services. Hence, as a corollary, the complete ownership and management of forests should not devolve to any public body that doesn’t have other sources of revenue for the protection and management of its forests and cannot conceive the essentiality of interlinked ecosystems and services.
3. For the sustainability of ecosystems and conservation of wildlife, it is essential that there exists a network of well-connected inviolate spaces. These inviolate spaces and their corridors have to be managed (and created wherever necessary) in a well-planned manner.
4. Communities who have traditionally been dependent on forests (including wildlife habitats) have the primary right to utilise the usufructs in a planned, organised and sustainable manner.
5. Wild animals should not be killed for fun, revenue or recreation. Whenever there has to be a choice between the life of a wild animal and the life or property of a human being, the human life and property gets preference. But the killing of wild animals just for fun, recreation or trophy through a process of sport hunting is against all ethics and ecosystem management principles. The core principle of dealing with this issue should be that human beings should not suffer for being born in or near a wildlife rich area.
Crop damage by animals is one major factor of human wildlife conflict. But the option or possibility of killing wild animals as a form of recreation or revenue generating activity is a hindrance to the development of any innovative strategy.
These are some of the principles of wildlife management that need to be discussed and incorporated in any major amendment to the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
Shahbaz Ahmad, IFS (Retd)
Former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Chief Wildlife Warden, MP
(shahbaz_in@rediffmail.com)