Somesh Goyal's Article in Sactuary Asia

Following is the unedited text of the article on protecting tigers that appeared in the June issue of Sanctuary Asia published from Mumbai.

Somesh Goyal, IPS, a wildlife protector and photographer, who was awarded the annual West Bengal Conservation Award in 2006 for his efforts in the state, writes that protecting and securing tiger habitats is no longer a negotiable option.

The bitter truth about the tiger is out. But who is accountable? Is it the Project Tiger authorities? Is it the Ministry of Environment and Forests? The Central Government? Or is it the Indian people themselves, who refuse to take their leaders to task?

The Wildlife Institute of India blames poaching, increasing human-animal conflict, declining prey base and loss of tiger territory on the demands of urbanisation as major reasons for the tiger's precarious situation. But the big cat is not the only casualty. Between 2003-2005, around 728 sq. km. of forests were wiped out, besides the degradation of another 630 sq. km. of productive forest.

The late Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi launched Project Tiger in 1973, which brought this charismatic species on the revival path. Those who allowed Project Tiger to flounder in the 1990s were the first in a long chain of people who allowed the tiger to become a soft target. With the periodic downgrading of Protected Areas and laws and a failure to create well-thought, landscape-specific strategies to secure and protect tiger habitats, the inevitability of the current crisis was just a matter of time.

In the wake of the Sariska debacle, Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh initiated several new steps including the creation of National Tiger Conservation Authority, Wildlife Crime Control Bureau and emphasis on centre-state partnership. The new Five Year Plan has allocated Rs. 600 crores for tiger conservation. While all the initiatives are praiseworthy, they over-emphasise on conservation methodologies and protection and security aspects still lie on the backburner. While the preservation and restoration of the natural environment is vital, it is the impact of poaching that has primarily left our tiger reserves in tatters.

The difference between conservation and protection or security is subtle. Conservation by its very nature connotes affirmative action whereas protection and security in contrast imply creation of checks to prevent any harm to the protected area. The Oxford English Dictionary defines protection as the "act of keeping safe from harm or injury" and 'security' means "protecting against attack or other criminal activities". Protection has several components. Perimeter security, access control, regulation of movement within the parks, development of preventive and actionable intelligence, surveillance over communities living within the reserve or park and investigation of crimes to bring the criminals to book comprise the main ingredients of a protection system for wildlife parks. Factoring 'protection' or 'security' in the planning for 28 tiger reserves and the newly-declared eight reserves is vital to the future of Panthera tigris in India.

In the past two decades circumstances have revealed how, despite global concerns for the tiger and considerable efforts within India, we have still not been able to create a truly safe environment for tigers. I believe it is little point accusing the forest staff responsible for tiger conservation for their ‘failure’ because the necessary skills and training have not been imparted to enable them to foresee, plan and execute protection and security.

Of course there is also the issue of park management. Barring a few notable parks, most Field Directors are located hours away from the scene of action -- the forest. On the spot decisions must therefore be taken by Forest Rangers, or at best, officials in the lowest hierarchy of gazetted officers who may not have the insight, or clout needed to implement vital initiatives. This situation has to change if field protection is to improve. There is just no option but to have Field Directors living on-site, supported perhaps by officers with administrative duties posted at the state headquarters.

All eyes are now on the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), which somehow has to insist that states make it mandatory for the head of the park to live in the park, or at best just outside, so that daily monitoring is the order of the day. Not guaranteeing this is tantamount to the Armed Forces defending the nation with local commanders operating from the comfort zone of cities.

The system must also wake to the fact that poaching and the illegal trade in wildlife products and derivatives are organised crimes and, time and again, criminals have exhibited sophisticated modus operandi and complete knowledge of the weaknesses of India’s prevailing system. Our response, therefore, has to match or better that possessed by the perpetrators. One department or agency cannot hope to cover the whole range of functions involved in conservation and protection. There is a definite need to adopt a multi-disciplinary and multi-pronged approach to protect all the tiger reserves. This of course needs central coordination and tremendous will on the part of the states to protect their own heritage.

The Union Government has plans to set up a National Tiger Protection Force (NTPF). But in my view, the government would be ill-advised to create a separate federal force for the protection of tiger reserves. Experiences in the case of the Central Para Military Forces have shown that most of the states tend to abdicate responsibility in case of a law and order situation, demanding central forces at the drop of a hat. If NTPF is raised, every tiger poaching episode will be followed by frantic demands from the concerned state for the force and in case of delay or refusal, it is very possible that failure to react to threats could degenerate into political mud-slinging matches.

This of course would do the tiger no good at all.

What we need is effective ground action. For this we need to build and reinforce local capabilities. Instead or raising a federal Tiger Protection Force, a much more cost effective, efficient and pragmatic response might be to bring specially selected, trained and motivated local police personnel into the grid. This way the forest guard will not be expected to change the nature of his work, which involves conservation of flora and fauna, clearing fire lines, monitoring wildlife and keeping communities and wildlife in a state of working harmony.

Hard protection requires a mental attitude that is by definition negative and suspicious; not exactly the kind of thing that would promote people-park relationships. On the other hand the police system, for all its foibles, is a well tried out, time-tested system that takes into account all jurisdictional issues including intelligence and investigation. Such vital functions, in the main, would concern cases of wildlife poaching, smuggling and crimes committed outside the borders of tiger reserves. To provide one example, without a shadow of doubt investigations may need to go beyond villages, cities, states and even international borders. For this the police appear to be a more suitable option because they are equipped and armed to undertake such protection, though I feel it should be a separate team within the police force that handles wildlife crime. On its part, the Central Government should meet the expenditure of such a team, which may well need to raise additional manpower after a proper risk analysis and protection audit of every reserve or park.
As of now tiger reserves are located in 17 states and the bulk of the on-ground work would involve perhaps twice this number of districts. The Superintendents of Police of these chosen districts should be motivated and involved in the task of protecting wildlife. Their experience, expertise and vision can help bring down poaching. To further the objective along, a reward mechanism on the lines of the Narcotics Control Bureau Enforcement Directorate would go a long way if it were built into the tiger or wildlife protection system.

The creation of the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau is a welcome and timely initiative. It will facilitate co-ordination, collaboration and data collection at a central point and will additionally address issues concerning intelligence and enforcement. As anyone involved with fighting wildlife crime will confirm, today information on wildlife crimes is itself woefully short. The Wildlife Institute of India and Project Tiger websites refer only to poaching and crimes but none of the sites provides up-to-date, pass-worded, crime data so vital to wildlife protection, investigation and strategy. To my dismay, I actually found the data on such sites referring to information gathered in 2003! The Wildlife Protection Society of India (WPSI) Crime Database on the other hand records over 15,300 wildlife crimes involving over 400 species. Collection and analysis of data is very important because it can show up crime ‘patterns’ and can help establish the identity of organised crime syndicates. Interpol suggests that the sale and distribution of illegal wildlife contraband constitutes the third largest illegal trade in the world after drugs and arms. India, unfortunately, is under the maximum threat because we are perceived to be a ‘soft source’ market. This worry was confirmed by a report of Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) in 2004, which identified India as the chief target for the traders of wildlife skins.

In the last century, tiger numbers have fallen from around 40,000 to under 1,500. If we want our forests to continue supporting these magnificent cats, a little modification in our strategy by including a multi-disciplinary approach and building in protection as a main component of conservation plans is the way to go. If we do this, we may be able to save the tiger from extinction and prevent a repetition of the Sariska debacle elsewhere in the country!