THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Even as the Keralam assembly has proposed to amend the Wildlife Protection Act 1972, environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta has pointed out that states cannot bring in amendments to the central legislation. Referring to the assembly passing the Wild Life Protection (Kerala Amendment) Bill 2025, Dutta said the state can bring in a new legislation that deals with compensation, but an amendment would not stand legal scrutiny. Speaking to TNIE on the sidelines of Vanaspandanam, a gathering of nature conservationists organised by the Coexistence Collective in Thiruvananthapuram on Wednesday, Dutta also rejected the argument supporting restrictive culling. Excerpts
The state assembly has passed a legislation to bypass delays in Wildlife Protection Act 1972...
States cannot bring in amendments to the central legislation. There’s no such provision in the Act. However, if the state government wants to provide compensation to farmers or those facing livelihood issues, it can be done under various schemes. In fact, states can even bring in a new legislation. The only thing is it should not go against the spirit of the Wildlife Protection Act.
The state feels that under specific circumstances, certain wild animals — those involved in human-wildlife conflict —should be eliminated...
According to the Act, killing any animal in defence of oneself is not an offence. However, if you enter a protected sanctuary for an illegal activity and are attacked by a wild animal, and if you kill the animal, it will be considered a violation. Every killing of wild animals should be investigated. Also, you need to identify the right animal. Today, we have so much technology, such identification is not difficult. At the same time, having a problematic animal around is not in the interests of long-term conservation. It creates a negative feeling among people.
Timely compensation to farmers is another aspect that you suggested...
Remedial compensation can also be advance compensation. You know for sure that they are going to suffer. An effective crop insurance scheme would help farmers suffering from agricultural losses due to animal conflict. Governments can earmark enough funds for the same from various schemes. We should not wait for death or total destruction to happen for providing compensation.
What do you think is the long-term solution to the issue of human-wildlife conflict?
The long-term solution is to recognise two things. Firstly, we need to protect the environment. If we look at the national scenario, we are legally diverting 105-110 acres of forest land every day. We have changed our priorities. Secondly, climate change is aggravating wildlife conflict. What we are experiencing is climate shock. States need to sit together and ensure much better planning for certain habitats.
There’s an argument that restrictive culling should be permitted to address human-wildlife conflict...
India is the only country which has a total prohibition on hunting. It’s a fact that controlled hunting, wherever it’s happening, has only increased the population of species.
