Battling for survival: India's wilderness over two centuries

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL India's Wilderness Over Two Centuries

edited by

VALMIK THAPAR OXFORD

A snarling tiger—under pressure and fighting for survival.

India in the nineteenth century. A natural world like no other— rich, diverse, and dense with wildlife.

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

India's Wilderness Over Two Centuries

Edited by

Valmik Thapar

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi 110 001 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kolkata Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi Sao Paulo Shanghai Taipei Tokyo Toronto Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in India By Oxford University Press, New Delhi © Oxford University Press, 2003 The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2003

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer

The publisher acknowledges the support of Hutchison Max Telecom Ltd. in the production of this book. ISBN 0 19 566293 8

Typeset by Le Studio Graphique, New Delhi 110 017 Printed at Pauls Press, New Delhi-110 020 Published by Manzar Khan, Oxford University Press YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi 110 001

This book is dedicated to the people who battled through the last 200years in order to save India's precious and unique wildlife.

• It is also a dedication to the spirit of conservation that has been part of organizations like the Bombay Natural History Society for over a century.

And especially dedicated to those who remain invisible and unrecorded and who strive to protect the natural treasures of this nation.

1

Preface

ix

Acknowledgements

xii

The N i n e t e e n t h C e n t u r y The Beginning

1

The Early Twentieth C e n t u r y

31

A Critical Period 1927-1947

72

The N e h r u Years Independent India: 1947-1964

149

The G a n d h i Era 1966-1989

241

The End of a C e n t u r y 1990-2002

317

viii

CONTENTS

Appendix I

371

Appendix II

389

Appendix III

403

Appendix IV

413

Appendix V

419

Bibliography

426

Name Index

443

Preface

T

his book is a glance through two centuries from 1802 to 2002.

It looks at the pages of the history of the wilderness written by people at different times and moments. It is about governance and the endless battles fought to keep our wilderness alive. I have u s e d excerpts and edited this a m a z i n g basket of w r i t i n g interspersing it with my comments. It is a collection of bits and pieces and I have loved every minute of putting it all together. For me it has been like a journey into an ever-changing wilderness. There are dozens of doctoral theses waiting to be done on different facets of these two hundred years. Nearly 150 years were under the British and they really plundered the forests of India. Who would not? Feudal or colonial or post-independence—India's politicians wanted a bit of the spoils. What if the British did not rule India? What if the first laws of the nineteenth century had not been legislated? What if tribal and other customary rights over forests had not been effected? Would anything have changed? Who knows? All I know is that in all societies a 'mafia' develops and that mafia wants its share of the spoils. There is no exception to this—and throughout these 200 years a tiny minority, who loved India's forests and fought for their very survival, tried desperately to minimize the plunder of the mafias. Did they succeed? Maybe to some extent. Till independence it was the white man battling most of the time. I have found very few records of Indians at the forefront of

x

PREFACE

conservation. Then in post-independent India a mixture of Indians and the British who stayed on battled the system, and then by the 1960s emerged the bunch that felt they could make a difference. They courted Indira Gandhi because she was the most powerful ally they had seen. I shudder to think what would have happened to Forest India or our conservationists without her or the laws she made. Could local tribals and forest communities have managed the wilderness against the ruthless vested interests? Would we have been better off with an Indira Gandhi rather than a Nehru in those first decades after independence? Who knows? All I know is that a tiny wild bunch battled it out over two centuries and that is why some of our natural treasures are left in 2003, and this wild bunch fought because they were in love with the wilderness of India. Most believed that little would survive the turn of the twenty-first century. But somewhere the grit and determination of a bunch of individuals did impact on all these years. This is the story of their battles and it is because of them that we still have fragments of wilderness alive. It is nowhere like what it must have been in 1802. But even today a place like Kanha or Kaziranga can take your breath away. So some of the battles had their impact and there are superb success stories to see as a result of them. Throughout the centuries the battles to save India's wilderness were fought whether by autocratic means, or exclusionary policies or authoritarian decisions or by keeping people out or restrictive regulations or top-down approaches—call it what you like. What mattered in the end is that the forest survives and this book has glimpses of some of those fighters and their efforts using every available method. It is about a bunch of people who loved the field in preference to the armchair or writing table. They knew some of the realities that the wilderness faced and focused on action rather than the endless academic exercises that go into the rhetoric of today in terms of 'how to save'. I hope this book inspires many more, especially forest officers, to fight for our wilderness and in the field where it really matters. I also hope that many NGOs learn from the example of the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) about the critical role that this organization played over the century in matters pertaining to

PREFACE

xi

conservation. It is truly remarkable and even though there were other associations, BNHS in a way spearheaded a variety of battles. Some of these battles are very similar to what we fight even today. The last decade in India's wildlife history has been tough. I have, through my own experiences, given it some shape. I only know that in 19921 thought that the tiger would be virtually extinct by 2000.1 was proved wrong and that is hope—hope for the future when more battles will be fought to save our wilderness from extinction. New Delhi 1 January 2003

VALMIK THAPAR

Acknowledgements

F

irstly I must thank J.C. Daniel of the Bombay Natural History

Society for not only pointing me in the right direction but also permitting me to extract so much information from the Society's journals which have been for me a source of great inspiration. I thank Pradeep Sankhala for allowing me to quote his father's work and George Schaller and Billy Arjun Singh for permitting me to use their work. I thank Oxford University Press for allowing me the use of M. Krishnan's text and Seminar for the use of my own writings. I thank Devyani Kulkarni for all her help in the research for this book. I thank the Holkars for the use of that amazing picture of a tiger on a car from their book, The Cooking of the Maharajas. I thank N.C. Dhingra for his unique picture of a tiger with its enormous crocodile kill probably one of the most unique pictures from India's wilderness ever taken. I thank Malvika Singh, Paola Manfredi, and Romila Thapar for their reactions and responses. I thank Sunny Philip for his help in typing the manuscript. I thank Mr Asim Ghosh and his team at Hutchinson Max Ltd. for his support towards the production of this book. And to Sanjna Kapoor and my son Hamir endless thanks for their inspiration during 2002.

mm The Nineteenth Century The Beginning

T

he early nineteenth century must have opened on an India that was nature's treasure house—rich and dense with a remarkable diversity of wildlife. Just a glimpse of those times comes from a few comments on the unbelievable hunts that could take place. One of the early records of the jungles and wildlife of India comes f r o m a r e m a r k a b l e book p u t t o g e t h e r by C a p t a i n T. Williamson in 1807, called Oriental Field Sports. It describes the India of those times and, for me, has always been a fascinating record of those early years when the wildlife of India resembled Africa and the first sport hunting had only just begun. This book, in a way, made history as the eighteenth century ended and the nineteenth started. It was a unique record of India's untamed wilderness. I quote what is one of my favourite plates and its connected description, which is about wild dogs and tigers: I am aware that the subject of this plate will be considered, even by many who have passed nearly their whole lives in Bengal, and especially in other parts of India, as being by no means authentic; and I am also sensible that some few have confounded the dhole, or wild dog, with the jackal. In fact, it has fallen in the way of very few,

18 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

to ascertain the absolute existence of the animal in question. However, the want of information in others shall not deter me from offering to the public what I know to be true ... About wild dogs Williamson states: They are by nature extremely shy, and avoid all places which are much frequented either by men or cattle. Residing, for the most part, in those immense saul-jungles, which, for hundreds of miles, appear like one black dreary wilderness, it cannot be supposed that Europeans in general, who mostly confine their occupations and their ordinary recreations to the open country, could have many opportunities of seeing them. The dhole community so called, though its name varies much in different places, appears to be about the size of a small greyhound. It has an uncommonly keen look; the countenance being highly enlivened by a remarkably brilliant eye. The body, which is slender and deep chested is very thinly covered with a reddish brown coat of hair; or more properly of a rich bay colour. The tail is long and thin; becoming like the feet, ears, muzzle and coat darker towards the extremities. Their limbs, though light and compact, appear to be remarkably strong, and to be equally calculated for speed, or for power. The peasants likewise state that the dholes are keen in proportion to the size or powers of the animal they hunt; preferring elks to other deer and particularly seeking the royal tiger. I have therefore suggested the probability that some particular enemy exists, which thins the tiger species; or else from the ordinary course of propagation, their numbers would, inevitably, extend to the destruction of every other animal. Knowing the immense powers and activity of a tiger, I should perhaps be somewhat skeptical in regard to the reports of the natives who assert, that not even the largest and fiercest can hold out against the dholes. When I first heard the people of Ramghur detailing their anecdotes on the subject, I was not disposed to give any credit to what appeared to me, such palpable absurdities; and indeed, I

T H E NINETEENTH CENTURY

3

was so illiberal as to ridicule their attempts, for such I considered them, to impose on me with such gross deception. I really could not reconcile it to myself, that dogs of any kind, or however numerous, could cope with a royal tiger. In this same book there was even a remarkable description of how local people hunt and kill tigers with arrows: Such is the velocity of the arrow, and so quick does this simple contrivance act, that, tigers are, for the most part, shot near the shoulder. Generally, tigers fall within two hundred yards of the fatal spot, they being most frequently struck through the lungs and sometimes straight through the heart. If the arrow be poisoned, as is most frequendy the case, locality is no particular object; though without doubt, such wounds as would of themselves prove effectual, unaided by the venom, give the shecarrie least trouble. The poison never fails to kill within an hour. As soon as the tiger is dead, no time is lost in stripping off the skin; for, were it suffered to remain until the heat might taint it, nothing could effect its preservation; it would rot a certainty; and, even were it not to do so, rapidly the hair would loosen and fall off. But it was also between 1806-1808 that the first 'conservation' of forests started and Captain Watson was asked to assess the forests of Malabar and Travancore. What an expedition it must have been for him! The gun was still to become a menace and its technology was still antiquated. This was a great moment for jungle expeditions and hunting parties. An English lady describes her shooting expedition in 1837 into the Rajmahal Hills of Bengal with 260 attendants and twenty elephants. Writing to a friend she stated: They do say that there are hills in Bengal, not more than a hundred and forty miles from here; and the unsophisticated population of these hills is entirely composed of tigers, rhinoceroses, wild buffaloes and, now and then, a herd of wild hogs. There, I'm going to live for

4

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

three weeks in a tent. I shall travel the first fifty miles in a palanquin and then I shall march; it takes a full week to travel a hundred miles in that manner . . . . We had thirty-two elephants out this morning to beat the jungles and to be sure, they were jungles that required beating. What is called high grass jungles, the grass being the consistency of timber, it seems to me, so very much higher than elephant, howdah, and human creature, nothing to be seen of them at 5 yards distance, nothing heard but the crunching of reeds by the elephants as they break their way through . . . . What is amazing about these times is the richness of the habitat as endless rhinos and tigers got flushed out by these expeditions. Another diary of 1839 has the following detail: William arrived yesterday; he looks uncommonly well ... He and Mr. A have killed 36 tigers, the largest number ever killed in this part of the country by two guns, and his expedition seems to have answered very well. In the early nineteenth century there was a remarkable character—and probably one of the first in the history of the forests of India—Alexander Gibson. He came to India for the first time in 1821 and by 1825 he joined the marine department of the Bombay government. Just before coming to India he learnt the Hindustani language in the UK. He served in India and in 1838, at the age of thirty-eight, became one of the first acting superintendents of the Botanical Gardens. From 1840 he conducted some of the first 'forest missions' ever done—he examined the northern forests, including Kolwun and Hunsool, and in 1841 did a forest tour of the Concan. In 1843 he visited the teak plantations in Poona and in 1844 the North Canara forests. By 1845 he was the interim conservator of forests appointed by Sir George Arthur. Till 1847 he surveyed endless forests in the Bombay Presidency and was officially appointed in the same year as conservator of forests, probably the first one in India. Even though there was an earlier 'conservancy' in Malabar between 1806 and 1823, perhaps Gibson was actually the first conservator—even before the creation

T H E NINETEENTH CENTURY

5

of a national forest department or service. The reason for his appointment was clearly to ensure enough timber for the British navy. The state of Bombay's forests in the 1830s was so bad and there was so much concern about timber supply that Governor Farish, in 1839, banned the cutting of teak—this was when the Military Board controlled all forests, though this changed in the 1840s under Gibson. Soon the political, revenue, and military departments would relinquish their hold on the forest. As a forest officer, Gibson was given full magisterial powers as early as 1848. His job was to provide timber to the government and to the people. Between 1846 and 1854 new responsibilities of planting roadside trees, thinning plantations, preserving babul plantations in southern Maratha country, and the scaling of fees on jungle timber were given to him. If Gibson got Rs 500 per month and Rs 10 every day as a travel allowance, the Bombay forest department had a budget of Rs 293 which increased to Rs 328 by 1856. Gibson's salary came from the marine department till 1860. Thereafter it became the responsibility of the public works department. What an amazing time it must have been! One of the few descriptions of Gibson's travels comes from the book The Dapuri Drawings whose author H.J. Noltie states: The only description of Gibson's mode of travel occurs in a letter to Hooker written in January 1858 from Tellicherry in Malabar describing his progress from Calicut to Coorg as follows: 'getting up at 3—walking 8 miles by torch light, horse riding four, and the remaining 3 in a mucheel or swinging hammock brings me to ground with comfort by or before 8 am, and this life I expect to have for the next hundred days'. H.J. Noltie: The Dapuri Drawings.

The life of the first forest officers of India must have been fascinating. It was only in 1864 that a national forest department was created—nearly twenty years after Gibson's work. Let us have some other glimpses of the nineteenth century. Major J.G. Elliot writes in Field Sports in India: 1800-1947:

22 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The troops of the Honourable East India Company, fighting their way against the Mahrattas north-west from Calcutta to the frontier on the Jumna, found a countryside where the cultivation surrounding the villages was interspersed with areas of thick jungle, tall trees growing out of dense undergrowth and extensive thickets laced with briers. And through this plentiful cover swarmed tiger, pig, deer, peacock, partridge, quail, snipe and duck. Small wonder that the officers of those days turned to sport for relaxation, setting a fashion that persisted to the end. By the start of the nineteenth century field sports were everywhere recognised as part and parcel of the life of the British community. The officers of those days were born and bred in the English countryside and love of sport was in the blood. There was game to be ridden, hunted or shot by anyone who took the trouble to ride a mile or two out of camp or cantonment. 'We had agreed to fire at nothing but tiger, and in consequence the deer and hogs, which we found in greater abundance than I could have believed, all escaped.' Those halcyon days did not last for ever but the next seventyfive years were the era of the great shikaris: Williamson, Shakespeare, Burton, Kinloch, Forsyth, Gordon, Cumming, Sanderson, Baker, Pollock, to name but a few of them. Game was everywhere plentiful and there was little limit or restriction imposed on what they shot, or where. In fact it was a matter of government policy to clear whole areas of game to open up fresh tracts for cultivation. About 1880 it began to dawn on the early conservationists that things had gone far enough. Soil erosion, following in the footsteps of the sacred cow, was stripping the countryside bare up to the boundaries of the government forests. And inside those forests some control became necessary over what might be shot. The early game laws date from then. Responsibility for giving effect to these laws rested with the officers of the Indian Forest Service, men who spent the months from November to March in the jungle, 'wise in more than wood lore alone', and they made a good job of it. The trips taken on long leave are unforgettable. You booked your forest block weeks, even months, ahead, wrote to the Survey of India for large-scale maps, and pored over them in anticipation till

T H E NINETEENTH CENTURY

7

you felt you knew every corner of them. Then the day came and you were away, away from the heat and dust of the plains, away from the monotony of an individual training programme that decreed that on the first of April each year the trained soldier once more became a recruit, away to the cool and peace of the jungle where you could not walk a hundred yards without seeing a track or hearing a sound that excited your curiosity and tested your jungle lore. Or if your fancy took you into hills, you marched for a week or ten days through scenery which in truth 'made even Scotland seem tame'. Cold sparkling air; perhaps by the side of the road a tiny waterfall pouring down over a cliff, the rocks tinged with rust, the water, ice cold, tasting faintly of iron; the camp fire outside the tent in the evenings. You stalked barasingha, or ibex or marcher at a height of over 15,000 feet across ground so precipitous you began to wonder why you had ever been fool enough to leave the flat. If you went back emptyhanded, though you seldom did, you had a host of memories to console you in your disappointment. If your regiment was stationed in central India, Cawnpore, Jubbulpore, Mhow, Belgaum, the jungle was at your doorstep and if you had your scouts out, and an indulgent colonel who asked no questions if you disappeared for a couple of nights, you might bring back a panther or even a tiger. In the Sunderbands, the vast delta of the Ganges, game was plentiful—tiger, deer, hog, rhinoceros and buffalo, but there the sportsmen travelled by boat, not on foot or on elephants, and stalking was difficult if not impossible because of the denseness of the reeds and thickets; to say nothing of the danger from tigers who were the most fearless and confirmed man-eaters in all India. The jungles of the United Provinces started about Dehra Dun and carried on along the foothills of the Himalayas beyond the provincial boundary for a total of six hundred miles. This is the Terai. In the south, along the frontier with Nepal, are vast swamps, the last remaining haunt in India of the rhinoceros. The northern half is drier but it is cut by foaming rivers pouring down from their sources in glaciers above the snow line.

24 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The greater part of this immense area consists of forest, dense thicket and tangled vegetation, and where there is water, a very high feathery-tipped grass, appropriately named elephant grass, grows abundantly. Where the grass has been burnt by villagers to obtain fresh pastures for their cattle, park-like glades, clothed in bright green, prevail. And to complete this game reserve, perhaps one of the finest in the world, there are numerous jheels and swamps. It harboured a few elephants, which were strictly preserved, as well as tiger, panther, sambhar and cheetal, barking deer and pig. The heat was never oppressive right up to June, and to fill the cup of happiness you might from your tent or forest bungalow hear one of the snowfed rivers tearing over rapids into deep pools that were the home of crocodile and turtle. The tiger claimed your attention in the early mornings and evenings, but the forenoon was given over to the mahseer. A six-pounder caught in heavy water on a one-inch fly spoon and a trout rod fought with a fury matched by few other fish. There are three well-defined though overlapping periods in the story of the sport of the British in India: up to about 1840, for forty years to 1880, and from then to 1947. There was little finesse about it to start with. Few knew or cared much about jungle lore; they were fearless, hard hitting, straightforward Nimrods, ready to ride down with spear or rifle anything they came across. They set the fashion and laid the foundations for those who came after them, but over the next seventy-five years the whole pattern of life changed so much—Game swarmed over the countryside and village life over large areas was disrupted by man-eaters. When the new military road was built from Calcutta to Benares to cut the distance of the old route along the Ganges, a belt of jungle had to be kept clear for a hundred yards on either side; otherwise tiger would have taken such toll of the travellers that only formed bodies of troops could have used the road. The evolution of a battalion at drill might be thrown into disorder by a stag seeking refuge from a tiger lurking in the jungle that bordered the parade ground. And when the day's work was over three or four officers would make up a party and go questing after tiger, pig, deer or whatever the countryside offered,

T H E NINETEENTH CENTURY

9

much as their successors a hundred years later would go out after partridge or peacock from battalion camp. When the Mahratta wars were over, about 1810, the countryside began to settle down, troops were collected in cantonments and game became scarce in immediate vicinity of military stations, but elsewhere it was still plentiful, and there were no game laws. You might have to travel forty or fifty miles to find something to shoot but there was no difficulty about that; parties of two or three would go into camp for a fortnight or even longer. With some semblance of law and order prevailing, the government, the East India Company as it still was, turned its attention to exploring the resources of what was really virgin forest. It was the day of Sanderson among the elephants in Mysore. Forsyth and Sterndale in the Central Provinces, men seconded for duty for the purpose. Their books mark the first serious attempt to record the natural history of the country, the customs of the people and the habits of the animals they shoot. Major General J.G. Elliot: Field Sports in India: 1800-1947.

I agree with Major General Elliot that it was a bunch of men, I call them the Wild Bunch, who somewhere between the middle to the end of the nineteenth century started putting down not only their hunting records but also what they saw of the rich natural history. It was a period which saw a spate of books on those remarkable times, and I am certain that it was because of the efforts of this Wild Bunch that many of the first laws on forest and wildlife conservation were founded and amended. The hunters had started to protect their wilderness and some even considered giving up the gun to save wildlife. People like Forsyth, Sanderson, and Sterndale recorded the remarkable richness of wildlife, and even without knowing it they were playing a vital role in what would happen in the next century. Even as early as in 1852 there was a growing concern in parts of central India, especially in Seoni and Mandla districts, about the cutting of teak and sal, and in the years that followed the first restrictions regarding cutting were put in place. For the first time permissions were required to cut timber while some species of trees even got reserved, and as the years rolled on the restrictions

10

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

on the extraction of timber increased. The British knew this was their wealth. They were fencing India's forests for their own use. Even in the Dangs district of Gujarat restrictions on felling were imposed. In fact the pressures were rising. After the mutiny of 1857 there was an enormous focus on expanding the railways and most of the wooden sleepers required came from the superb sal forests dotted across India. It must have been encounters like these in the nineteenth century that opened the minds of those in power to enact legislation in order to own this untapped treasure house. By the end of the 1860s the pressures began for legislation. Would anyone ever believe that the first bit of wildlife or forest legislation concerned the protection of elephants? The fauna and flora of India from the 1860s till the turn of the twentieth century were protected by the following legislations and rules: 1. The Elephant Preservation Acts of 1873 and 1879 (Madras 1 of 1873 and India VI of 1879): These Acts prohibit the killing, injuring, or capturing of wild elephants except in self-defence or under a licence. The reason for this act was clear. The British wanted strict controls on the wild elephant because it was an economically viable asset. At least 2000 of them were being caught each year. This was a historic law and functioned to limit the use of the elephant. By 1879 this legislation on elephants was applicable to all of British India. Shooting was permitted only of individual elephants that were a danger to humans. This law was enacted nine years after the creation of the imperial forest department in 1864, and it probably played a role in strengthening the powers of this department. It also heralded the beginning of a series of Acts and legislations that would empower the British to control forest India. 2. Madras Act 11 of 1879: The operation of this Act is confined to the Nilgiris and provides for closed hunting seasons. 3. There were three other Acts concerning the forests of India:

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

11

(a) The Indian Forest Act, 1878. (b) Madras Forest Act, 1882. (c) Burma Forest Act, 1902. The Indian Forest Act further strengthened the powers of the forest officers and the imperial forest department while enabling large tracts of forests to be b r o u g h t u n d e r the control of government. The wealth of the Indian forest had finally been realized—be it timber, minor forest produce, wildlife, or its derivatives. It was all now the property of the government. By the turn of the century nearly 20 per cent of British India would be government-controlled forests. There were a few other laws that were also enacted: 4. The Wild Birds and Game Protection Act, 1887. 5. The Act relating to fisheries in British India, 1897. It was all these laws that carried India into the twentieth century and they came about because a need must have been felt to preserve the forests, keep them alive, and of course control them. Controlling then meant controlling the wealth of India. There must have been a group of people who intervened in the system to create these laws and these were the first pieces of legislation that were used in the governance of the natural wealth of India. It is in this period of time somewhere in the 1880s that our story starts. It was in 1883 on 15 September that seven gentlemen, interested in natural history, got together and proposed to meet each month to exchange notes, exhibit specimens, and encourage each other. It was this gathering that created the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS). The Wild Birds and Game Protection Act of 1887 had probably triggered a debate. Concerned people were getting involved in the process of governance. All the laws were recent and the biggest debate concerned hunting. The Wild Bird and Game Protection Act of 1887 came into being because of a growing concern regarding the depletion of game—this concern being raised by hunters all across India. In a way, it would be an Act that would protect game for the hunting season and a t t e m p t to p r e v e n t the s l a u g h t e r of wildlife

12

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

indiscriminately. However, this Act was vital to India's wildlife and in the period immediately after its enactment m u c h correspondence resulted. Probably some of the most fascinating bits of dialogue were over the protection of insectivorous birds in the interest of agriculture. BNHS was only a few years old, yet many found it an important forum in which to express their opinions. Within a year of the Act being passed there was a demand for its reconsideration, as will be evident from the correspondences quoted below:

Correspondence Relating to the Protection of Insectivorous Birds in the Interests of Agriculture Bengal Chamber of Commerce Calcutta, 31st January 1888 No. 90 of 1888 From S.E.J. Clarke, Esq. Secretary, Bengal Chamber of Commerce, To Sir E.C. Buck, Kt., C.S., Secretary to the Government of India, Revenue and Agricultural Department. Sir,—The Committee of the Chamber of Commerce desire me to hand you copy of a letter, dated 5th January, from Mr. John Rudd Rainey, Zemindar of Khulna, and copy of the Englishman of 31st December, containing a report of a lecture delivered by him before the Agricultural and Horticultural Society of India. With reference to these papers I am to say, that a reconsideration ofAct XX of 1887, An Act for the Protection of Wild Birds and Game', for the more effectual protection of insectivorous birds in the interests of Agriculture would have the support of the Chamber of Commerce.—I have, & C., (Signed) S.E.J. Clarke, Secretary. Journal ofBombay Natural History Society, Vol. 4 (1889), p. 124.

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

13

The Protection of Insectivorous Birds At a meeting of the Agri-Horticultural Society on Thursday, Mr John. Rudd Rainey, F.R.G.S., delivered an address on the 'Effectual protection of insectivorous birds in the interests of agriculture.' He said: As this Society has ever since its foundation, extending over a period of well nigh three score and ten years, been foremost in bringing forward and discussing all subjects likely in any way to promote agricultural interests in this country, as well as advocating such measures as are calculated to prove conducive thereto, hence I venture, as a member of it, to introduce this by no means unimportant subject to their notice with, the view of inviting a discussion upon it at this meeting, and persuading the Society to move the Government to pass an enactment of the effectual protection of insectivorous birds in the interest of agriculture. I am more especially induced to do so now, as the recent promulgation of a legislative enactment (Act No. XX of 1887), entitled An Act for the Protection of Wild Birds and Game', fully recognizes the fact that, the destruction of insectivorous birds injuriously affects agriculture, and endeavours to mitigate the evil, but not to any appreciable extent. This of course, is not sufficient. The utter extermination of insectivorous birds will, no doubt, be thereby prevented, but what is really wanted is something more, the effectual protection from destruction of these useful, nay valuable, birds to agriculturists. It being now an admitted and well known fact, that insectivorous birds are the best friends of agriculturists, it is therefore altogether unnecessary for me to lay any stress upon this point. But it may be stated that, in India, where insects are so various, numerous, and prolific, the destruction they commit on growing and ripening crops is simply incalculable, so much so that a stipulation is sometimes inserted in agricultural leases to the effect that no reduction of rent on account of destruction of crops by insects will be allowed.

14

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Perhaps some persons may be inclined to think that the preservation of insectivorous birds would result in the total extermination of all insects, useful and destructive alike, so I may point out that Nature, in her wise provision for the protection of all things created, has happily provided against such a contingency, by supplying to those insects most exposed to danger from birds, forms and colours assimilating to the plants on which they are found, and that they thus obtain some appreciable protection from their enemies of the feathered tribe: the most striking illustrations of insects being in some measure insured against danger by their similarity to plants are of course those of grasshoppers, walking leaf insects (genus Phylliam of Entomologists), and the various members of the curious family Phasmida, all common to this country. I hope that what I have here advanced will induce the Society to make a fitting representation to the Government on the subject, in order to move the Supreme Legislature to pass a more liberal measure in the all-important interest of the agriculturists. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 4 (1889), pp. 126, 127, 129.

I find the above extracts of this 1888 note fascinating. More than a century ago, one man fought to protect insectivorous birds, whereas today no one even realizes the importance of these birds. It was clear that the 1887 Act had started a process of dialogue t o w a r d s protection and its impact was to be felt on other legislations as well. By 1888 the impact of the previous year's legislation was to effect change in the Indian Forest Act of 1878, and under Section 25 (i) of this Act the following restrictions and amendments were made in the interest of 'game':

Notification The 29th November 1888 No. 6925—The Chief Commissioner is pleased, under Section 25(i) of Act VII of 1878 (The Indian Forest Act), to prescribe the following rules to be in force in all 'Reserved Forests' in the Central Provinces:

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

15

I. The poisoning of water for any purpose whatever is prohibited. II. 1. Hunting, shooting, fishing or setting of traps or snares is prohibited, except with the permission in writing of the Deputy Commissioner or a Forest Officer duly authorized by him or by the Conservator of Forests in this behalf, and specifying the particular forest or forests to which the permission applies, and the period for which it is current. 2. The permit may either be general or may restrict the holder to the hunting or shooting or trapping or snaring of particular species, or may prohibit the hunting or shooting or trapping or snaring of any particular species. 3. The permit shall specifically prohibit the destruction or capture of animals of any species in respect of which the Chief Commissioner has directed the observance of a close season, during the term of such close season. 4. The permit may impose restrictions upon the choice of camping grounds within the forests, and shall in all cases specify the number of companions, retainers, followers, and animals which the holder of the permit may take with him into the forest. 5. Any permit granted under this rule shall be liable at any time to be cancelled by order of the officer granting it or of the Conservator of Forests, and shall cease to be valid in the event of fire occurring in the forest to which it applies. 6. Forest Officers of and above the rank of Sub-Assistant Conservator of Forests are exempted from the operation of this rule within the limits of their respective charges. III. Any breach of the Forest Act or of any rules made under the Act by the holder of a permit granted under Rule II, or by his retainers, shall entail forfeiture of such permit. IV. Nothing in these rules shall exempt the holder of a permit granted under Rule II from liability under the Forest Act, or

16

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

any other Law, for anything done in contravention of such law, or for any damage caused by him or his retainers. V. The fees to be charged for the permit issued under Rule II shall be as follows: 1. A fee of one rupee per diem for each sportsman or shikari follower entering the Reserve. 2. A fee of eight annas per diem for each elephant or camel entering the Reserve. 3. When the permit authorizes a camp to be formed within the limits of a Reserve, the pay and allowances of a forest subordinate to be deputed to attend the camp. F.C. Anderson, OfFg. Secy. To the Chief Commsr., Central Provinces. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 4 (1889), p. 75.

As the technology of the gun advanced, a group of people focused on creating restrictions in the laws in order to minimize the damage of uncontrolled hunting. Where would we have been without such interventions? What would have happened but for these nineteenth century laws or their amendments? What would have happened without the debates and actions of the NGOs of that era, like the BNHS? Again there was much debate about these issues and the BNHS played a vital role restricting the desires of the hunters and their lobbies. Let us not forget that the year was 1891, more then 110 years ago, but the few NGOs that existed were strong and effective then, unlike today. Let us take a look at an early intervention by the BNHS.

The Protection of Wild Birds and Animals The following letter has been addressed to Government by the Bombay Natural History Society on the subject of protection of birds and animals in the presidency:

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

17

From The Honorary Secretary, Bombay Natural History Society, To The Acting Undersecretary to Government, Bombay SIR,—I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter No. 1575 of 28th February last, containing draft rules, under section 25(1) of the Indian Forest Act, proposed by Mr. A.T. Shuttleworth. The Rules have been submitted to a large number of the members of this Society, and I am now instructed by the Committee to say that, in their opinion, the rules, if passed (with exception of Nos. 1 and 4), will be most unpopular and will prove a constant source of irritation and annoyance to everyone. The Committee of the Society have carefully considered the question from its various standpoints, and are strongly of opinion that the subject is of such importance that Government should pass a special Act with a view of establishing a 'Close Season', during which all indigenous wild birds and harmless wild animals should be protected. Considering the wanton destruction of birds for the sake of their plumage, which has of late taken place in many parts of the country, and which appears to be on the increase, the Committee are of opinion that protection should not be restricted to game, but should extend to all indigenous wild birds, as well as to harmless wild animals, and that a measure based on such liberal and comprehensive lines would meet with the approval and sympathy of Natives as well as Europeans. In the meanwhile, in an appendix, several extracts from a large number of letters which have lately been sent to this Society from Sind and other parts of the country. H.M. Phipson, Honorary Secretary, Bombay Natural History Society. 6, Apollo Street, 16th April, 1891.

18

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Appendix There can be no doubt that, unless some steps are taken to prevent it, the time is not far distant when the indigenous game birds of Sind will be well nigh exterminated in the more open parts of the country. Having had some experience all over this district, I know that the Black Partridge has decreased greatly in number, especially in the Rohri and Shikarpur districts. It was in the Rohri district that they were netted for their plumage in enormous numbers a few years ago. I believe the number was as mentioned by Mr. Symons—some 40,000. The shooting grounds about Mungrani, the Shikarpur district, are now worthless. As regards other birds, a considerable traffic in plumage goes on in a quiet way, and one only occasionally hears of it. A year or two ago there was a great demand for certain feathers of the common paddy bird, for which Rs 22 per 'tola' were paid. As very few feathers from each bird are taken, and these are small ones, the number of birds required to produce a tola' weight of these feathers was considerable. I expostulated with the zemindars about it, but I heard that several men had made a good deal of money by slaughtering the birds for the sake of these few feathers. I do not think this sort of thing ought to be permitted. Sind, February, 1891. I am afraid the figures reported to you were anything but exaggerated. Seven or eight years ago it was rumoured that 80,000 Black Partridge skins had been sent off from one station in the Rohri Division (Shikarpur district). In this (the Eastern Nara) district large numbers of large blue Kingfishers and Egrets used to be killed and last year I came across a band of Madrassees engaged in trapping Kingfishers. The awful destruction men of this class must cause may be imagined when it was worth their while to come every year this long journey form Madras, and they were able to pay all expenses and make a living out of the sale of the skins they procured in their cold weather tour. H.M. Phipson, Honourary Secretary Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 6 (1891), pp. 281-2.

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

19

This was also a moment of time when people wrote about the amazing links they found between Man and Beast. John Lockwood Kipling in 1891 put pen to paper about 'Beast and Man in India'. He called his book A Popular Sketch of Indian Animals in their Relations with People. He wrote just after the Legislative Council of India passed an Act XI of 1890 for the prevention of cruelty to animals. All these early Acts would play a vital role in the future protection of animals. An extract from Kipling's book follows: One of the most surprising things in the country is the patience with which depredations of the crops are endured. With far less provocation the English farmer organizes sparrow clubs, and freely uses the gun, the trap, and the poisoned bait. And the Indian farmer suffers from creatures that earn no dole of grain by occasional insecticide. The monkey, the nilgai and blackbuck, the wild pig, and the parakeet fatten at his expense, and never kill a caterpillar or weevil in return. He and his family spend long and dismal hours on a platform of sticks raised a few feet above the crops, whence they lift their voices against legions of thieves. The principle of abstaining from slaughter is pushed to an almost suicidal point in purely Hindu regions, and becomes a serious trouble at times. A large tract of fertile country in the N.W. Provinces, bordering on Bhurtpore State, is now lapsing into jungle on account of the inroads of the nilgai and the wild pig. The 'blue cow' or nilgai is sacred, and may not be killed even by the villagers whom the creature drives from their homes, and there are not enough sportsmen or tigers to keep down the wild boar. Gardeners try to scare the birds with elaborate arrangements of string, bamboos, old pans, and stones in their fruit trees; and sometimes a watcher sits like a spider at the centre of an arrangement of cords, radiating all over the field, so that an alarming movement may be produced at any point. Yet their tempers do not give way, and they preserve a monumental patience. Sometimes they say: 'The peacock, the monkey, the deer, the partridge, these four are thieves,' or include other animals and birds with varying numbers, but always with more resignation than resentment. The wisdom of the village says that public calamities are seven, and are visitations of God:

36 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

drought, floods, locusts, rats, parrots, tyranny, and invasion. The professional bird catcher, however, is never of the farmer race, and owes his victims no revenge; while a scornful proverb on his ragged and disreputable condition shows that he earns no gratitude from the cultivator. Another rustic saying about bird slaughter, expanded into its full meaning, would run: 'You kill a paddy-bird, and what do you get? A handful of feathers!' Yet since Parisian milliners have decreed that civilised women shall wear birds in their head-gear, there is not sufficient respect for animal life to say the barbarous slaughter of them now going on all over India. The tolerance or indifference which leaves wild creatures alone is unfortunately an intimate ally of blank ignorance. That townspeople should be ignorant of nature is to be expected, but even in the country aflycatcher,a sparrow, and a shrike are all spoken as chiriyas, birds merely, a not one in fifty, save outcaste folk, can tell you anything of their habits, food, nests, or eggs. The most vague and incorrect statements are accepted and repeated without thought, a habit common to all populations, but more firmly rooted in India than elsewhere. First-hand observation and accurate statement of fact seem almost impossible to the Oriental, and education has not hitherto availed to help him. In the West public instruction becomes more real and vital year by year, but in the East it is still bound hand and foot to corpse of a dead literature. Educational authorities in India discern the fault, but they are themselves mainly of the literary caste and direct native Professors whose passion is for words. We talk of science teaching, but forget to count with a national habit of mind that stands carefully aloof from facts and is capable of reducing the splendid suggestions of Darwin and Wallace, Faraday and Edison, to mechanical and inert rote work. Indifference is intensified by the narrowness of sympathy produced by the caste system, and by the discouragement of attachment to animals among respectable people. Our modern schoolbooks, in which lessons on animal life and humane animal treatment are wisely included, and do something in the course of time to lighten this 'blind side' of Oriental character, and in a few

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

21

generations we may hope for an Indian student of natural history. At present this splendid field is left entirely to European observers, who mostly look at nature along the barrel of a gun, which is a false perspective. I conclude that, while admitting the need for a legislative measure for the protection of animals, consonant with the wishes and feelings of the most cultivated classes in India, and of itself a sign of advancing civilisation and morality, it would be a task as difficult as hateful to prove that the people at large have any abnormal and inborn tendency to cruelty. The shadow of evil days of anarchy, disorder, and rapine has but lately cleared away and given place to an era of security, when, as the country proverb says, 'the tiger and the goat drink at one ghat'. The people are better than their creeds, but it is not easy to defend their practice, though it is often more due to necessity, custom, and ignorance than to downright brutality of intent. Kipling had a strange way of writing—a strong sense of arrogance pervaded through his words. He did not realize that the so-called ignorance of the Indian people was not ignorance at all but a deep rooted tradition towards nature, a fear and respect of it that kept the natural world alive for them. Can you imagine an India where everyone carried a gun and was ready to cut down every tree? Can you imagine an India where the blue bull was not sacred ? Can you imagine an India without Durga riding the tiger to defeat evil? Can you imagine an India where the banyan tree was not sacred? The soul of India was its belief in nature. Thank god for a lack of Western education and scientific attitude! That is why so much of it lived. And still does. Nature was a part and parcel of daily life. Kipling never could understand this. There were many who like Kipling could not fathom the ritual and belief of the country. But there were others who knew that the secret to the survival of India's rich wildlife lay in the belief of her people in nature and the connection of all the natural world to the gods and goddesses that made up the universe. You do not have to study natural history to protect nature. By the 1890s there were several circulars, instructions, and memos to control the indiscriminate hunting of species that were deemed as going extinct. I reproduce one such circular:

22

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Circular No. 1525 OF 1891 General Department Commissioner's Office Karachi, 23rd September, 1891 Memorandum The Commissioner is informed that persons have been in the habit of snaring and destroying, for the purpose of selling their plumage, the Black Francolin Partridge, the Blue Kingfisher (Halcyon smyrnensis), and several species of Egrets and other birds, and to so great an extent that several species, useful for food as well as ornamental, have been rendered nearly extinct in some parts of the Province. Two persons have recently applied to the Deputy Commissioner, Thar and Parker, for permission to destroy ornamental birds for the sake of their feathers, on the Eastern Nara, on the ground that they have cleared the species out of the Delta of the Indus. 2. The Commissioner desires, therefore, to remind District Officers that the right to destroy ferae naturae as well as fish, has, in Sind, always been a Government royalty, and privilege is sold in certain localities. No one, therefore, can be allowed the privilege gratis as against Government, and the Deputy Commissioner, Thar and Parker, has, therefore, properly refused to grant the permission sought for. 3. Revenue and Police Officers are now directed to inform persons who have not paid for the right that they will not be permitted to destroy birds for the sake of their plumage, and to prevent their doing so. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 6 (1891), p. 487.

Such circulars were examples of the first steps taken for the enforcement of the laws and had been triggered by the process of interventions made by the many concerned persons. It also reveals the power of the government over the forest and its produce. It must have been a really exciting time in the history of India's forests. A century was coming to an end and another was about to start. It was the beginning of the first discussions on how to govern the forests and these were the first years of the birth of the

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

23

Imperial Forest Service. It was also a moment for many to bring forth new ideas about wildlife and whether game could be replenished and how; but this was British India and as the centuries changed there is no record of any Indian being involved in conservation—they were totally out of it—at least as far as the British government records were concerned. Also, there were endless discussions about proposals to reintroduce game in different areas, one of which was Bombay. Who said that the idea of reintroduction was a new phenomenon? This was 1892!

The Proposed Introduction of Game Into the Neighbourhood of Bombay Mr. H. Littledale, of Baroda, in bringing forward his proposal, said: I beg to suggest that an attempt should be made to introduce the Chukor into this part of India. Such an effort would certainly succeed on the Aravellis and Vindhyas, along the big rivers. Again the painted Partridge is our only Southern-Bombay bird; the Black Partridge, a far finer bird, caught to take advantage of the R.M. Railway and settle in our grass birs. He flourishes on the hot grassy plains of Rajpootana, amid the tamarisks of the Indus, and along the banks of the Jhelum in Cashmere; any climate seems to suit him, wet or dry. The Chukor stretches across Asia, Africa, and Europe, from the Chenab to the Rhone; I have found its nest, at 11,000 feet, in Baltistan, and it ranges through the low hot levels of Mekran and Arabia. It is a very gamey bird, and, if a fair chance were given it, it would certainly thrive on our ghats everywhere. The Bengal Florican might flourish on the Neilgherries; it lives at 7 to 9 thousand feet in the rainy Pir Pinjal, and the Neilgherry climate would suit it perfectly. There are several African animals, antelopes and so forth, that would thrive in India, and might be easily introduced.

24

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Let our Sectional Committees take this suggestion up, if they think it worth action on. Money would certainly be forthcoming for a well-considered scheme of introducing to the Bombay side animals that would probably thrive there and give good sport to future generations of sportsmen. I look to this, rather than to vexatious game laws, to provide such shikar in the future as has been enjoyed in the past. Mr. G.W. Vidal said that he had received a letter from Mr. E.C. Ozaune, the Director of Agriculture, in which he offered to allow the Society to make use of the Government farms at Budgaum, Poona, and Aligaum for experiments in connection with the acclimatization of game birds. Mr. Vidal also pointed out that land suitable for Black Partridges existed in this Presidency. But I take the opportunity of suggesting that we make an experiment with Pheasants. I thoroughly believe that if pheasants were turned down in the grass lands and teak jungles near the Western Indian Ghats, and protected, a splendid stock might be reared. Every kind of suitable food is present in those jungles for pheasants, and there is plenty of water. I should add about the Bengal Florican that it would be a most interesting experiment, as the bird is not known west of the Ganges. That it is possible it would thrive on the same lands and food as its smaller half-brother, the Lesser Florican or Likh, which is not uncommon in the Deccan and at the Null in the Guzerat. I should doubt, however, our being able to obtain the Bengal Florican in sufficient quantities. I should also suggest the introduction of the African Guinea Fowl. Whatever we do now, we shall do more for the next generation probably than for ourselves. The proposal about Markhor can only be taken as a suggestion to offer to the Neilgherry Game Association. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 6 (1891), pp. 119-22.

Many must have gone in for reintroductions—as we shall soon see. Exotic species were an attraction and welcome everywhere. Today few would think of introducing an exotic specie. In fact in places like South Africa, all exotics are being exterminated, including the Himalayan Tahr that ended up above Cape Town.

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

25

Different areas enacted their own laws, rules, and guidelines for hunters and for the protection of wildlife. One such well-known body was 'The Nilgiri Game and Fish Preservation Association' which was created in the 1870s, and their Annual Report of 30 June 1893 makes interesting reading:

The Nilgiri Game and Fish Preservation Association [Extracts from the Annual Report for the year ending 30th June, 1893.] Increase of Game and Results of Protection Sambhur—There is still a great scarcity of good stags, and such scarcity must continue so long as licence-holders and others butcher small brockets. In the deer forests of Scotland, on Exmoor, in Germany, Newfoundland and many other places, none but 'warrantable' stags are allowed to be shot. On these hills, there is nothing whatever to restrain anyone but his own feelings of humanity and sport. For the Mudumalai Forest, however, special rules have been published, which prohibit the shooting of brockets. These rules have been in force from 1st July, 1892, and have worked satisfactorily. Ibex—The Association has to announce, with great regret, that the small herd of 5 ibex which existed in Tarnad Burray has totally disappeared, and the only buck left: on Konabettu was killed by a landslip last February. It is to be hoped that one of the 2 kids born last year may be a buck; otherwise this small herd of 7 (including the kids) must become extinct. Elsewhere on the Kundahs and at Pakasuramalai the ibex are slowly increasing. As already remarked, ibex are much preyed on by panthers, and a small herd cannot make head against their depredations: a larger herd of 20 or 30 may continue to increase in spite of such losses. Bison—A few young bulls are still with the herds in the Mudumalai Forest. Though there were 6 sportsmen shooting in these forests during the year and every inch of the ground was gone over by them, only one black bull was seen. The herds, too, have decreased in number since last year.

26

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Spotted deer—The wild dogs have done much damage to these deer during the year. A pack of over 40 dogs appeared in the Sigur Forests and killed deer every day for some months, when the pack suddenly broke up into twos and threes. Nine dogs were found lying dead in the forests. Mr. Liebenrood also reports that he found 3 wild dogs lying dead in the forests near Nellakotta. The presumption is that distemper or some other disease broke out in the pack. Some such cause must operate in keeping wild dogs in check, or they would rapidly increase and overrun the whole country. Antelope—These will increase, no doubt, in time with efficient protection. There are 3 or 4 small herds of 5 or 6 in each in the Sigur forests. Small Game—Woodcock have been scarce. Hares fairly plentiful, except in places where jackals are abundant. There is a satisfactory increase in jungle fowl in all the large sholas, but in the small sholas they are shot down every season and have but a poor chance of breeding. Exotic and Introduced Game Chickore—Single birds are occasionally seen, and a convoy of 15 was reported in the neighbourhood of Billikal. Pheasants—Those turned out in Lovedale are occasionally seen; others have been seen in Governor's shola, Marliamund plantation, Tudor valley and elsewhere. The birds have apparently scattered widely, as is their habit. Of the 12 pheasants originally imported, there are 8 alive; also 3 chickens hatched out. The eggs do not appear to be fertile in the hot climate of Karteri, and the chickens do not live long when hatched. Mr. G. Oakes, who spent over a thousand rupees in importing pheasants from England at his own expense, came to the same conclusion and removed his birds to Ootacamund, where, to his great disappointment and the lasting regret of all sportsmen, they were destroyed to a bird by a marauding jackal, which gained entrance into the pen at night. Rabbits—The game watcher reports that he occasionally sees rabbits, but they have probably scattered and are not likely to increase very fast in such a vermin-infested district as Karteri.

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

27

Peafowl—The Honorary Secretary has not relaxed his efforts to obtain pardees to capture peafowl. After sending men over the Mysore District, a gang was found, but they declined to enter the Government forests even though offered an advance of Rs. 10, as they imagined it was only a ruse to entice them away and put them in jail! The Forest Department hunted them out of the forests before, and this is really the reason why it is so difficult to get hold of them now. However, it is to be hoped that when the season commences for capturing peafowl, the Association will be able to obtain the assistance of these men. Partridges—The Association is under great obligations to those gentlemen who have, at their own expense, endeavoured to further sport and benefit the district by the introduction of game and fish or who have assisted the Association by donations for the furtherance of the same good objects. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 8 (1893), pp. 535-6.

The Nilgiri Game and Fish Preservation Association was the earliest private organization in the country to create its laws and follow them meticulously. Hunters were very particular about their game and would go to any lengths to protect it. They believed that they were the protectors and that their shooting had minimal impact on the wildlife of the area, as long as all the rules were followed. And could the locals ever follow the rules? Or were they poachers? Did they have any rights over the game? For most of the British, the natives were a nuisance. C.E.M. Russell had a section in his book Bullet and Shot in Indian Forest, Plain, and Hill, written in 1900, about poaching and other nuisances of the late nineteenth century. Did such people minimize the damage caused by the poachers? Who was really causing the damage? Poachers and Nuisances Of the multitude of poachers which harm the many species of large and small game in the continent of India, I am doubtful whether I ought to award the palm for destructive power to the Indian wild dog (Cuon rutilans), or to the class of native whose object is to slay, by any means in his power, and utterly regardless of both sex and age, any animals, the

28

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

flesh of which may command a ready sale in his vicinity. The injury done to the head of game by both is incalculable; but, inasmuch as the native is always at work, quietly and unostentatiously, slaying, without, as a rule, driving the game out of the sphere of his operations, while the terror which is inspired by a pack of wild dogs, hunting in any particular tract of forest, is such as to denude that tract temporarily of all its fera natura and so to necessarily limit the operations of the canine poachers to an occasional visit, I am inclined to think that the human poachers are even greater curse to the sportsman than are the dogs. I will therefore deal first with the poaching native. Generally he possesses a gun—an antiquated, long-barrelled weapon as a rule, but one which, when loaded with several irregularly shaped chunks of lead, a handful of slugs, or two bullets, does terrible execution at close quarters—and a native has far too keen an eye to the retention of what he possesses to risk even a charge of powder and lead unless he is morally certain of scoring. With his bare feet he can walk almost as noiselessly as a cat; practice has rendered both his eyesight and his sense of hearing exceedingly acute; he knows every waterhole, salt lick, and glade in the jungles near his home (and his operations do not usually take him far afield); and this knowledge, together with his intimate acquaintances with the habits of the game, added to an unlimited store of patience, and a total disregard of the value of time, constitute, with his afore-mentioned antiquated weapon and few charges of powder and lead, a stock-in-trade which is amply sufficient for his purpose. For hours he will lie in ambush watching a waterhole, at which, in the hot and dry season, deer will come to slake their thirst; or a salt lick, whither they repair, especially in wet weather, to eat the salt earth; but let even a gravid hind or young fawn approach his hiding place so close that to miss is well-nigh impossible, the murderous charge is launched, and the exulting poacher secures an animal whose flesh can be sold. The time has undoubtedly come when a check should be put on this state of things by the impositions of gun and game licences, priced sufficiently highly to prevent the majority of these poachers from incurring the expense of so large an outlay. In Mysore, as I have elsewhere stated, there is nothing to prevent anyone from entering even the State forests (except during the fire season) for the purpose of shooting; and

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

29

the ridiculous cost of a gun licence (about four pence) and the absence of any game regulations, enable the poacher to make a very comfortable living at the cost of very little exertion, and at an outlay in cash of almost nil. There are many other human poachers, particularly gipsy-like wandering tribes, who do not use guns, but who are extremely expert in every conceivable device for capturing game, both large and small, and whose methods often combine great simplicity in form, with consummate ingenuity in design. Antelope are sometimes captured by the turning out, on ground inhabited by wild herds, of a tame buck with nooses fastened to his horns. The natural pugnacity of the wild buck induces him to try conclusions with the intruder, with the result, of course, that the former's horns are entangled, and he is then easily despatched. By this method, bucks only are taken, but another plan for the wholesale capture of the animals, without regard to sex or age, is practised with success in parts of Mysore. A large number of natives, each with a long cord, to which at intervals nooses of strong gut are attached, proceed together to a place towards which the configuration of the ground renders it probable that a herd inhabiting the vicinity may be successfully driven. The cords are then firmly pegged down in a long and often double line (the second some yards behind the first), and the men, by making a very wide circuit, endeavour to get round the herd, and to drive it in the desired direction, when, should the operation prove successful, several of the animals are often caught by the legs, and promptly butchered by the poachers. Pit-falls, dead-fall traps, nooses set in various ways, and numberless devices, too manifold to enter upon here, are employed with variable success to reduce wild animals into possession; while the wholesale capture (by highly successful methods) of all edible game birds and wild fowl, forms a never-failing source of income to the professors of the art. Nuisances in Indian Shooting In addition to the list of poachers, all of whom in greater or less degree are of course nuisances to the sportsman, there are two or three nuisances to the sportsman, which are entitled to special mention.

30

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

One of these is the 'did-he-do-it plover, so called from its startling strident note when disturbed. This troublesome bird is very partial (for nesting purposes) to little open spaces in the jungle, and the sportsman who may, while moving stealthily, with rifle on full cock, through a likely part of the forest in search of deer, have had the misfortune to startle one or a pair of these birds, knows well that every animal within hearing of that eerie cry has as surely taken the alarm as if it had itself seen the human intruder. Another unmitigated nuisance to the sportsman in Thibet is the kyang or wild ass, whose irritating curiosity leads it to gallop round a stalker as soon as it has perceived his presence, and by its absurd antics to communicate the alarm to the game which he is endeavouring to approach. Monkeys, too, are often to blame by chattering when they see a sportsman, and thus drawing the attention of all other animals within hearing to the fact that an enemy is on foot; but as they often do the sportsman a service by indicating in the same manner the whereabouts of a tiger or a panther, it is comparatively easy to forgive them for an occasional indiscretion. C.E.M. Russell, Bullet and Shot in Indian Forest, Plain and Hill, p. 346-55.

Russell believed that after the native poachers the wild dog was the biggest poacher and menace. It was because of people like him that the wild dog was declared vermin and nearly exterminated from the face of India. It was also a moment of time when arrogance and self-righteousness directed the decisionmaking process. The ruler was the hunter, and he was obsessed with his sport and always trying to remove any obstacle in this path, be it native poacher, wild dog, or even red-wattled lapwing! The nineteenth century came to an end. No one knew what the next century would bring for wildlife. Many who cared must have had their fingers crossed. Poachers were out poaching, traders trading, hunters slaughtering, villagers protecting, the government pulling down the timber, and yet there was a tiny band of people always fighting to save the wilds of India. The battle entered the next century.

W%% l

The Early Twentieth Century

A

s the century turned, stricter rules governed sport hunting. Some of the first changes were initiated in the Bombay presidency. I think the reason for this was very clear. By the end of the nineteenth century and into the twentieth century the system of bounties had been totally abused. The gun had developed—it was easy to shoot and be accurate. Wolves, wild dogs, and even tigers had been incessantly slaughtered. Even before the turn of the century George Yule had killed 400 tigers and M. Gerrard 227. They were soon to be overtaken by the local rulers of Udaipur and Gauripur who shot more than 500 tigers each. Another ruler, the Nawab of Tonk, crossed the 600 mark. Such hunting records were only the beginning. The situation led to much debate and makes fascinating reading: To The Secretary, Bombay Natural History Society. Sir—I think it worth while to send you the above copy of a letter from the Revenue Department that members of the Society may know how they stand with regard to the new forest regulations. These apply to all forests of any consequence in the Presidency. Yours faithfully, A.C. Logan, I.C.S.

32

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Revenue Deaprtment Bombay Castle, 18th August 1903 No. 5627.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 25, clause (i) Section 31, clause (j), and Section 75, clause (d), of the Indian Forest Act, 1878, the 25th July 1894, published at page 751 of Part I of the Bombay Government Gazette (except in regard to the Province of Sind), His Excellency the Governor in Council is pleased with the previous sanction of the Governor-General in Council to prescribe the following rules to regulate hunting, shooting, poisoning of water and setting of traps or snares in the Reserved and Protected forest of the Bombay Presidency excluding Sind: 1. The following acts are absolutely prohibited in all Reserved and Protected forests: (a) the poisoning of rivers or other water and explosion of dynamite therein for the purpose of killing or catching fish; (b) the setting of spring guns; (c) the taking, wounding, or killing of big game, other than tiger, panther, wolf, hyena, wild dog, pig or bear, over water or saltlicks; (d) wounding or killing any game birds or hares during the close season fixed in the Appendix. 2. The setting of snares or traps is prohibited in all Reserved and Protected forests except with the written permission of the Divisional Forest Officer. 3. (a) In any reserved forests or portions of reserved or protected forests to which the local Government may, for the purpose of strict conservation or for the preservation of animals which are becoming rare, or for both of these purposes, apply these and the following rules by a notification published in the Bombay Government Gazette, hunting and shooting are prohibited except under a licence to be obtained from the Conservator of Forests, (b) Every licence issued under clause (a) of this rule shall permit the holder to hunt and shoot, and shall be valid for a period

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

33

of one year from the date of its grant in any reserved or protected forest in the presidency to which these rules are made applicable under clause (a), subject to the condition that before it has effect in any forest division in which the licencee does not reside or exercise any jurisdiction, it must be countersigned by the Divisional Forest Officer, (c) No such licence shall entitle the holder to hunt or shoot more than two stags or bulls of each species of animal to be specified in the licence, according to a list to be prepared for each Forest Division by the Conservator of Forests. 4. Licences shall not be refused except for special reasons to be stated in writing. 5. Wounded game may be pursued into the forests of the division adjoining that for which the licence is valid or into a forest closed under Rule 8. 6. A licence granted under these rules shall not be transferable. 7. Every person to whom a licence has been granted under these rules, and who is found hunting, shooting, snaring or trapping in any forest to which these rules apply, shall on demand by any forest, police or revenue officer, produce his licence. 8. The Conservator may on the recommendation of the Divisional Forest Officer and the Collector, declare that any particular forest or part of a forest is wholly closed for a term of years or annually for a specified season. He may also prohibit the taking, wounding or killing of any particular species of animal in any specified tract of forest, with a view to the preservation of such species but any such order shall be subject to revision by the Commissioner. To such forests the validity of licences granted under these rules does not extend or is modified accordingly, provided that gazetted officers whose jurisdiction extends to such forests, or persons holding licences on which the Divisional Forest Officer has endorsed special permission to that effect may kill pig, tigers and other dangerous or destructive animals in such forests. Such special permission shall not be given for a longer period than one month in any case.

52 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

9. If any person to whom permission under Rule 2 or a licence under Rule 3 has been granted commits a breach of any provision of the Indian Forest Act, 1878 (VII of 1878), as amended by the Forest Act, 1890, (V of 1890) or any rules made thereunder, he shall be liable to the penalty of having the permission or licence, as the case may be, cancelled by the Divisional Forest Officer, in addition to any other penalty to which he may be liable under the Indian Forest Act, 1878 (VII of 1878), or otherwise. An appeal against the cancellation of the permission of the licence by the Divisional Forest Officer shall lie to the Collector and a special appeal, in case of dismissal of the appeal by the Collector, to the Commissioner, whose decision shall be final. 10. In any case where the Divisional Forest Officer or Conservator thinks it advisable, he may direct that a Forest Guard or other person shall accompany the camp of any licenceholder hunting or shooting in forests, with the object of seeing that forest rules are not infringed by camp followers. 11. The word 'hunting' as used in these rules, includes tracking for the purpose of discovering the lie of wild animals, provided that any person holding a licence is not prohibited from employing any number of trackers. 12. Nothing in these rules shall be taken to exempt any person from liability in respect of any offence by injury to the forest or its produce or of any other offence punishable under the Indian Forest Act, 1878 (VII of 1879), as amended by the Forest Act, 1890 (V of 1890). 13. Nothing in these rules shall be taken to cancel any privileges granted to resident wild tribes except by the express order of the Collector, or to preclude the grant of special permission by the Divisional Forest Officer or Collector to resident villagers on special occasions. [N.B.—Forest in which wild tribes have been given the privilege of hunting will not generally be notified under Rule. 3] Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 16 (1905), pp. 522-5.

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

35

As the rules became stricter, some of the slaughter was minimized but it led to much conflict and furore amongst those who felt restrained. But there were always some who supported the stricter rules. Reginald Gilbert was a sportsman who, in 1907, felt that the general bounty on tigers should be suspended. He felt that the drastic reduction of wild animals in the Indian empire required immediate correctives. But in the years that followed, it became clear that the enormous deforestation in places like Sind and the Punjab and the pressures of bounty hunting had wiped out the tigers from these areas. As changes were proposed in the laws and efforts undertaken to make stricter laws to protect game, the Bombay Natural History Society was always consulted. This was probably because their information base was so well respected. Those in the process of governance knew that if they wanted good advice they would get it from the BNHS. The year 1908 was critical as a vast area of grassland along the Brahmaputra river in Assam was set aside for what was to become India's first preserve for the rhinos. It was called Kaziranga. It was also the year when the Indian Forest Service was managing two million hectares of sal forest for both India and the British empire. The following correspondence highlights the importance of the BNHS and the respect it commanded: To The Honorary Secretary, Bombay Natural History Society. Sir—I am directed to forward herewith copies of a letter from the Government of India, No. 1848, dated the 14th August 1908, and the Bill accompanying it and to request that Government may be favoured with the opinion of your Society on the provisions of the Bill. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient Servant, (Sd.) R.E. Enthoven, Secretary to Government.

36

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(Copy) No. 1848. From Sir Harold Stuart, K.C.V.O., C.S.J., Offg. Secretary to the Government of India. To The Chief Secretary to the Government of Bombay Simla, the 14th August 1908. Home Department, Public. Sir—I am directed to refer to the correspondence ending with your letter No. 2739, dated the 19th May 1905, regarding the protection and preservation of game and fish. 2. The replies to the Home Department letter No. 1082-90, dated the 23rd May 1904, with which a draft bill was circulated, disclosed a strong consensus of opinion in favour of protective legislation, while indicating a considerable divergence of opinion on the principles of the bill. 3. A revised draft bill has accordingly been drawn up, and I am directed to circulate it for the further criticism and opinion of local Governments. The revised bill defines game and takes power for local Governments to declare a close time during which it will be unlawful to capture, kill or deal in any specified kind of game or the plumage of any specified bird. Fish have been excluded from the scope of the proposed law, as their case can be suitably provided for by rules under the Indian Fisheries Act. The bill also provides for a general exception in favour of the capture or killing of game in self-defence or in protection of crops or fruit, and gives power to local Governments to apply its provisions to birds other than those specified in the definition. It may be noted that clause 3 corresponds substantially to clauses 5 and 7 of the original bill, which were generally approved, and that clause 5 corresponds to clause 18 of that bill which also met with general approval. Clause 7 which applies only to birds is far less sweeping than clauses 2(1) and 7 of the original bill. In short the present bill embodies in an improved and simplified

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

37

form those provisions of the original bill which met with general acceptance. The Government of India consider that the proposed law will for the present be sufficient to restrict the indiscriminate slaughter of game, if it is combined with suitable restrictions imposed by rules under the Forest Acts in force in the different provinces. 4. The legislation contemplated is likely to be of limited application, as it is probable that in many parts of India the protection afforded by forests to species threatened with extinction will make it unnecessary to apply the measure, should it be passed into law. It may, however, be argued that the proposed bill, so far as it goes beyond the scope of the Wild Birds Protection Act, 1887, and especially in its application to deer and other animals which are liable to injure growing crops, is open to the objections stated in the Home Department Resolution No. 147181, dated the 29th August 1885. I am to request that these points of possible objection to the measure may receive the consideration of the Governor in Council and that the Government of India may be furnished with an expression of the views of His Excellency in Council on the scheme of legislation now formulated. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient servant, H.A. Stuart, Offg. Secretary to the Government of India. (Copy) A Bill to make better provision for the protection and preservation of game. Whereas it is expedient to make better provision for the protection and preservation of game: It is hereby enacted as follows. Short title and extent. 1.(1) This Act may be called the Indian Game Act 1908. (2) It extends to the whole of British India, including British Baluchistan, Santhal Parganas and Pargana of Spiti.

38

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Definition. 2. In this Act—'game' means all kinds of the following birds and animals when in their wild state, namely: (1) bustards, ducks, floricans, geese, jungle fowl, partridges, peafowl, pheasant, pigeons, quail, sandgrouse, snipe, spur fowl, and woodcock; (2) antelopes, asses, bison, buffaloes, deer, gazelles, goats, hares, oxen, rhinoceroses and sheep. Close time. 3. The Local Government may, by notification in the local official Gazette, declare any period of the year to be a close time for any specified kind of game throughout the whole and any part of its territories; and, during such period and within the areas specified in such declaration. It shall be unlawful: (a) to capture or kill any such game; (b) to deal in any such game; (c) to deal in the plumage of any bird specified in such notification captured or killed during such close time. Penalty for illegal capture or killing of, or dealing in, game. 4. Whoever does, or attempts to do any action in contravention of Section 3, shall be punishable: (a) on the first conviction with fine which may extend to fifty rupees, and (b) on the second conviction with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees, or with both. Presumption of commission of certain offences. 5. Where any person is found in possession of any game recently captured of killed, the Court may presume that he has captured or killed such game.

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

39

Savings. 6. Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to affect the capture or killing of game in self-defence, or in bona fide protection of a standing crop or growing fruit. Application of Act to other birds. 7. The Local Government may, by notification in the local official Gazette, apply the provisions of this Act to any kind of bird other than those specified in Section 2, which in its opinion it is desirable to preserve from extinction. Repeal. 8. The Wild Birds Protection Act, 1887, XX of 1887, is hereby repealed. To The Secretary to Government, General Department, Bombay Castle, 6, Apollo St., Fort, Bombay, 13th January 1909. Sir—With reference to your letter No. 5740 of 1908, dated the 19th September 1908,1 beg to forward herewith the opinion of this Society on the proposed Bill, 'to make better provision for the protection and preservation of game.' I regret the delay that has taken place in forwarding the Society's opinion but the matter had to be referred to a Sub-Committee of ornithologists and others many of whom are stationed in other Presidencies, and it was only on receipt of these individual opinions that my Committee were enabled to formulate their views. I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient servant, (Sd) W.S. Millard, Honorary Secretary, Bombay Natural History Society.

40

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Bombay Natural History Society The Committee of the above Society have considered with great interest the Bill in which the Government of India propose 'to make better provision for the protection and preservation of game'. In view of the importance of the subject to Members of the Society, the opinion of a Sub-Committee of some of the leading ornithologists and sportsmen in India has been obtained and this Sub-Committee, while approving generally of the Bill, have made certain suggestions with a view to the more effective attainment of the objects. Clause 2—Some alteration is in the opinion of this Society required in this clause. (1) Should read 'Bustards, (including florican), ducks (including teal), jungle-fowl, spur-fowl, pea-fowl, pheasants, partridges [including Snow-cocks (Tetraogallus himalayensis)], SnowPartridge (Lerua nicicola), Sandgrouse, Painted-Snipe, Quail, Pigeons and Woodcock'. The other snipe and Geese do not need to be included as they breed outside Indian limits. (2) This part of the clause needs no alteration in our opinion. It has been suggested that Wild Asses should be excluded from the provisions of this Act but it has recently been brought to the notice of our Society by H.H. the Rao Saheb of Cutch that these animals frequently stray from Cutch into British Territory where they obtain no protection. Clause 3—(b). This clause might include the 'heads' or 'trophies' such as skins, horns or hoofs. (c) This Society would like to point out that in this clause no mention is made of the Herons (Ardeidae) and Kingfishers (Alcedinidae), the plumage of which is so greatly in demand in Europe, and they consider that special mention should be made of these birds. Clause 4—This clause should be made to include the confiscation of game heads, skins and other trophies as well as punishment for the offence

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

41

Clause 6—This clause should in the opinion of our Society have the following words added: 'but that the skins, heads or trophies or animals so captured or killed shall be handed over to the local authorities together with an explanation as to the reason of their being so killed or captured'. The inclusion of these words will, it is hoped, prevent native shikaris from shooting animals for trophies for sale under the plea of'protecting crops'. Clause 7—This clause should in our opinion include any kind of'animal' as well as 'bird'. It is also the opinion of this Society that the results of this Bill will depend entirely on the working of it by the various Local Governments and it is partly with this idea that they suggest the inclusion of the above additions. As naturalists as well as sportsmen, the Society would like to see the Bill extended to all Birds and Animals which are either harmless or useful to man, and protection not merely restricted to game, and they hope that the Government of India will be able to see their way to introduce such a Bill at some future time. W.S. Millard Honorary Secretary Bombay Natural History Society. 13th January 1909. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 19 (1908-09), pp. 220-^.

The above is a remarkable record of consultation between the government and the non-government sector. This was 1909, and the first serious amendments to the 1887 Wild Birds and Game Act were being contemplated. The first decade of the twentieth century had taken a toll on the wilderness. There was a flurry of writing and a unique piece was written on the traffic in birds. P.T.L. Dodsworth wrote on 'Protection of Wild Birds in India and Traffic in Plumage' in the Bombay Natural History Society Journal. What a superbly researched article it is, based at the end of one century and the beginning of another, with a strong plea at the end to ban the trade and fashion of feathers:

42

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Protection of Wild Birds in India and Traffic in Plumage by P.T.L. Dodsworth, F.Z.S. The fauna of British India is protected by the following Acts and Rules: (1) Madras Act II of 1879—-The operation of this Act is confined to the Nilgiris. It provides for close seasons, and prohibits the killing, capturing, and selling of game and fish during such seasons. (2) The Elephant Preservation Acts of 1873 and 1879 (Madras I of 1873, and India VI of 1879)—These Acts prohibit the killing, injuring, or capturing of wild elephants, except in self-defence or under a licence. (3) Forest Laws: (a) The Indian Forest Act, 1878—Sections 25(i) and 31(j) (b) Madras Forest Act, 1882—Sections 21(i) and 26(f); and (c) Burma Forest Act, 1902—Sections 26(h) and 33(c). (4) The Wild Birds and Game Protection Act of 1887 (Act XX of 1887). (5) The Act Relating to Fisheries in British India (Act IV of 1897)— This Act prohibits the destruction of fish by dynamite or other explosive substance in any water, or by poisoning of water; and provides for the protection of fish in selected waters. As the scope of the present inquiry is restricted to birds alone, it will only be necessary to turn our attention to No. (4)—The Wild Birds and Game Protection Act of 1887. This Act extends to the whole of British India, and empowers Local Governments, Municipalities, and Cantonments to frame rules prohibiting (a) the possession or sale during its breeding season within the Municipality or Cantonment of any kind of wild bird recently killed or taken; and (b) the importation into the Municipality or Cantonment of the plumage of any kind of wild bird during such season. It would be tedious and wearisome to dilate on the early history of what is known as the 'protection' movement, which beginning in 1869,

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

43

culminated in the Act of 1887. It will suffice to state for our purpose that in 1886 the question of having a general game law for India engaged the attention of the authorities, but such law was then considered unnecessary. It was, however, decided that Local Governments should be empowered to frame rules prohibiting the sale of game within cantonments or towns during a specified season of the year, and with this object, the Act (XX of 1887) was passed. It is chiefly directed against the destruction of birds, but Local Governments have the power to apply its provisions to any other game. The limited provisions of this Act, which apply to Municipal and Cantonment areas only, will be readily understood when we bear in mind some of the reasons which actuated Government in objecting to afford wider and more stringent measures of protection. They were: (a) The predominant claims of agriculture, to which all other considerations must be subservient. (b) The undesirability of interfering with the livelihood of forest and other wild tribes, who depend largely upon the capture of game for their subsistence. (c) The general objection to the creation of new penal offences. (d) The unjustifiability of legislation in the interests of the sportsmen. (e) The absence of evidence that the destruction of birds for the sake of their plumage was carried out on an extensive scale, and that there was any serious diminution in their numbers. In 1900 the Honorary Secretary of the Society for the Protection of Birds raised the question of the advisability of stopping the export of the plumage of ornamental birds; and in the following year in the Budget Debate of the 27th March in the Supreme Legislative Council, the Hon'ble Sir Allan Arthur urged upon Government the expediency of protective measures for game in India. During his visit to Burma in 1901 Lord Curzon was approached upon the subject in a public address. His Lordship returned a sympathetic reply, admitting that the enactments in force did not go far enough, and that more stringent measures were called for. In addition to this, numerous other representations to a similar

44

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

effect were received by Government, or appeared from time to time in the public press. In view of these representations, and of the fact that a considerable time had elapsed since the passing of the Wild Birds and Game Protection Act of 1887, Lord Curzon's Government decided to inquire into the matter, and to ascertain how far the existing measures had been attended with success. The Local Governments were accordingly asked to report (i) upon the working of the Act in question; (ii) whether it afforded an adequate measure of protection; (iii) the extent to which the skins of birds of handsome or useful plumage were exported, and whether the trade had increased or decreased of late years; and (iv) whether there was any extensive destruction of wild birds, especially of non-migratory insectivorous birds, during what should be close seasons for them; and, if so, whether it was leading to the extermination of any species. The replies received to this reference showed clearly that the working of the Act had proved a failure. And this was only to be expected, since the prohibitions applied only within a specified cantonment or town during a specified season. Rural areas (except forest areas) were beyond the scope of the Act. There was nothing to prevent birds being killed during the close season, and the detention of their skins or feathers outside Municipal or Cantonment limits as the case might be, until the prescribed period was over; or by the transfer of the bird-killing operations beyond the specified boundaries. As to the adequacy or otherwise as a measure of protection, the general consensus of opinion was that existing legislation did not sufficiently meet the necessities of the case. After careful review of the whole subject the authorities have taken up the question of the advisability of a general Game Law for the protection of game in India, and this is at present under consideration. The proposed bill is of a very simple nature, and affords adequate protection to those wild birds and animals which are threatened with extermination. It defines game, and takes power for Local Governments to apply its provisions to birds other than certain specified ones. Fish have been excluded from the scope of the proposed bill, as their case has been suitably provided for by rules under the Indian Fisheries Act.

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

45

The replies to (iii) and (iv), in respect of exportation and destruction, disclosed not only a serious, but a most disastrous state of affairs. From all parts of the country came the same cries of destruction and diminution, which amounted to virtual extermination. Of Impeyan and Argus pheasants throughout the Himalayas, of Peacocks and Black Partridges from Bombay, of Egrets from Sind and Burma and of a host of others, including Jungle-cocks, Paddy-birds, Kingfishers, Jays, and Orioles throughout India generally. So lucrative was the trade that single districts, such as Lucknow in the United Provinces, and Amritsar in the Punjab, contributed between them nearly 16,000 lbs. of plumage annually. Taking as an average 30 skins to the pound, the figures, indicated the destruction of nearly five hundred thousand birds in a single year from two districts alone! From Bombay it was reported that a single Railway Station to the north of Sind had exported within a few months 30,000 skins of Black Partridges, and that over many square miles in the Rohri Division these birds had, within two seasons, been absolutely exterminated by a single party of professional trappers. Various other reports showed that birds were netted and trapped, not by thousands, but by millions, without any regard to season or sex. The hen on her eggs, or with chicks at her feet, were all fair spoil to these unscrupulous hunters. A Postal Official, who was stationed for many years at Dharamsala, gives an interesting account of these operations. 'Monal and Argus pheasants,' he remarks, 'are snared in large numbers by professional trappers in the Kashmir and Chamba Native States, and also in the hills near Kulu, Dalhousie, Dharamsala, Palampur, etc. Snares are set in localities which are not frequented by sportsmen and others, and female birds and animals are destroyed wholesale. I have personally seen scores of young Monals and female pheasants entangled in the snares. The intention of the snares is, of course, to entrap male Monal and Argus Pheasants, but the system is such that every living thing that comes into the traps is destroyed. A short description of the system of snaring might prove of some interest. A hedge of branches of trees, brushwood and grass is erected from the bottom of a hill to the top. At every ten or twelve places, there is a small opening in which a spring snare is fastened. The snare is composed of a bent branch and a slip-knot. While the birds and animals are feeding, they come across the hedge, and naturally look for an opening in order

46

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

to cross it. On finding one, they endeavour to pass through it, and are caught in the snare.' The writer adds that 'the extent of the indiscriminate slaughter under such system can only be realised by those who have witnessed it.' And if these reports were startling, the enormous extent of the export trade in plumage was equally so. During the years 18951900, the total quantity and value of feathers (Indian merchandise) exported by sea from India to other Foreign countries amounted to the gigantic total of 11,49,354 lbs., representing a value of Rs 15,51,831. The details were made up as follows: Province from which Exported

Quantity

Value

(Lbs.)

(Rs)

Bengal

1,69,499

6,64,942

Bombay

9,46,067

7,43,807

881

1,710

23,499

1,12,388

9,408

28,984

11,49,354

15,51,831

Sind Madras Burma Total

The greater part of these feathers were exported to the United Kingdom and China; a considerable portion also went to Austria, Hungary, France, Germany and the Straits Settlements, and the balance was distributed in small quantities between Belgium, Japan, Arabia, Persia, etc. Nor were these the onlyfigureswhich the authorities had before them at the time. It appeared that much of the export trade was also conducted through the medium of the India Post Office. For the period from 1st July 1898 to 30th June 1901, the records of a single Post Office, namely, that of Bombay disclosed the facts that 1,521 parcels, containing birds' feathers of the aggregate weight of 6,813 lbs., and valued at £23,653 were addressed to the United Kingdom, while the rest were addressed to other countries. With these data before them, it was obviously impossible for the authorities to view with equanimity such an intolerable state of affairs. All reports and returns showed conclusively that the trade was rapidly increasing; that birds were being killed wholesale for the sake of their plumage; and that, if prompt measures were not taken, the extermination

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

47

of various species, which are to be found in India only, was imminent. Accordingly as a first step to check this indiscriminate slaughter, a Notification No. 5028 S. R., dated the 19th September 1902, was issued, under Sea Customs Act, 1878, (VIII of 1878), prohibiting the taking by sea or by land out of British India of skins and feathers of all birds other than domestic birds, except (a) feathers of ostriches, and (b) skins and feathers exported bona fide as specimens illustrative of Natural History. As this prohibition was issued without notice or warning, a large number of representations were received, notably from a trader in Simla, who had in stock skins of Impeyans and black Argus to the value of Rs 6,000 and from two firms in Calcutta who had in hand 6,000 skins of Impeyan and Argus pheasants, and six cases of Kingfishers' feathers, and to enable them to dispose of their stocks, and to wind up their businesses, the operation of the orders was suspended until the 1st January 1903. Shortly after this, the attention of Government was drawn to a letter which appeared in the Madras Mail of the 29th June 1903, in which the writer gave prominence to the fact that no provision had been made for detecting the export of feathers and plumage by land to territories of Foreign Governments in India, such as Goa and Pondicherry. This point immediately received due attention, and with the cordial co-operation of the French and Portuguese authorities, these outlets for export were also closed. In July of the same year (1903) a Postal Notice drawing attention of the public to the prohibition of 18th September 1902, was issued to the following effect: 'It is hereby notified that the transmission by post out of British India of skins and feathers of all birds other than domestic birds, except (a) feathers of ostriches and (b) skins and feathers exported bona fide as specimens illustrative of Natural History is prohibited. 2. In the case of all parcels containing birds' skins or feathers for which customs declarations are required, the name of the bird must be entered in the customs declaration; and if exemption from the above prohibition is claimed on the ground that the skins or feathers are being exported bona fide as specimens illustrative of Natural History, a statement to this effect must be made in the customs declaration, otherwise the parcel will not be accepted for transmission by post.'

48

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The trade in plumage, however, being very lucrative, the above measures were not sufficient to check it, and it appeared that export by foreign parcel post, under false declaration, was resorted to largely. In consequence of this, two Notifications No. 1819-60 and 1821 -60, dated the 26th February 1907, were issued under the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 (VI of 1898), empowering certain postal officers to search, or cause search to be made, for birds' skins and feathers in course of transmission by post to any place outside British India, and making the customs declaration in respect of parcels handed to the Post Office for transmission by the Foreign post, a declaration required by the Post Office Act. As the position in respect of the illicit traffic in plumage from India is not generally known, we have given in detail the foregoing review of the various preventative measures, taken from time to time, in this country, and it will be observed that the Indian Government have practically closed every possible channel of export. But in spite of all these prohibitions, smuggling to a large extent has commenced, and still continues. The explanatory memorandum which is prefixed to Lord Avebury's 'Importation of Plumage Prohibition Bill' is most pertinent to the subject, and deserves to be quoted in full: 'The object of this Act is to check the wanton and wholesale destruction of birds which is being carried on everywhere throughout the British Empire, and in all parts of the world, without regard to agricultural, educational and aesthetic value of birds. As a proof of the extent of the destruction that at present goes on, and which is threatening the extinction of the most beautiful species, it may be mentioned that at the plume auctions held in London during the last six months of 1907 there were catalogued 19,742 skins of birds of paradise, 1,411 packages of the nesting plumes of the white heron (representing the feathers of nearly 115,000 birds), besides immense numbers of the feathers and skins of almost every known species of ornamental plumaged bird. At the June sale, held at the Commercial Sale Rooms, 1,386 crowned pigeons' heads were sold, while among miscellaneous bird-skins one firm of auctioneers alone catalogued over 20,000 Kingfishers. A deplorable feature of recent sales is the offer of large numbers of lyrebirds' tails and of albatross quills. The constant repetition of such figures as the above—and these plume sales take place at least every two months—shows that the Legislature

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

49

must choose between the extermination or the protection of the birds in question.' The statements in the above memorandum, astounding as they may seem, are nevertheless indisputable, and the inference that may be drawn therefrom, viz., that an enormous illicit trade flourishes at the present time, is fully borne out by an examination of the records of the Indian Customs Authorities. During the years 1903-1910, no less that 19 cases of smuggling were detected at the ports of Calcutta, Bombay, Madras and Burma. There were 25 cases in Calcutta, 8 in Bombay, 10 in Madras, and 6 in Burma. A brief description of some of the more important of these cases which have been detected (in addition to the one noticed by Mr. Buckland) is not only interesting but instructive as showing the methods adopted by smugglers engaged in the plume traffic: Bengal (a) In April 1903 a Chinese firm were caught exporting a case of Kingfishers' skins. They were fined Rs 1,000, and the skins were confiscated. The good were declared as 'Fish maws'. (b) In October 1904 another firm were caught exporting three cases of Peacock feathers. The goods were intended for Hamburg, and were declared as 'Indian curios'. (c) In August 1905 another Chinese firm were detected exporting 18 cases of Kingfishers' skins. They were intended for Hong Kong, and were declared as 'Tobacco'. An examination of their books showed that since the prohibition of 1902 they had made no less than nine shipments of such goods. They were, therefore, fined Rs 10,000. (d) In the same year it came to light that a German firm in Calcutta had on various occasions smuggled consignments of Osprey, Heron and Grey Paddy Birds' feathers to the value of Rs 22,850. They were fined Rs 7,200. The goods were intended for London via Hamburg and Bremen. (e) In January 1906 a ^f^pniedan presented a shipping bill for 'three baskets of Appfers', which really contained Kingfishers' skins to the valuqfof Rs 800. The consignment was intercepted.

50

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(f) In June 1906 a consignment of five parcels, containing Osprey feathers, which had been posted in Calcutta addressed to Colombo under a misdescription 'Pieces of yellow cloth' was detected. This case is a typical one, and is illustrative of the procedure sometimes adopted by smugglers. When they find it difficult to ship goods from a particular port they send them by post, and if they wish to make sure that they will not be seized in the post, then, instead of despatching them direct to a foreign address, they post them to some small Indian port, whence they can be redespatched with less fear of detection; or else they send them to a similar intermediate destination by rail. Bombay (a) During 1907-1908 two cases of smuggling of feathers occurred in this Presidency. In one case 41 packets of Egrets' feathers from Rangoon were intercepted at short intervals by the Bombay Post Office. The feathers, which were of very considerable value, were confiscated. In the other case 25 large boxes of Peacock feathers were shipped from Singapore on their way to Europe under a false shipping bill in which the contents were declared as 'Country Cotton goods', and the identity of the shippers concealed. The shippers were traced with much difficulty, and severely dealt with, while the feathers were confiscated. (b) In 1908-1909 a case of attempt to export by train 823 Jungle fowl skins, with feathers complete, was detected at Castle Rock. The exporter was fined Rs 300, and was given the option of redeeming the feathers on payment of Rs 4,000. Madras During the year 1907-1908 there were 10 cases of attempted exportation of Osprey feathers from the above port. The penalties imposed amounted to Rs 3,005. Burma The only important case of smuggling of feathers reported from the above is one which occurred in 1909-1910. The goods were exported from Madras to Rangoon, but as this could not be regarded as 'exportation

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

51

out of British India', the matter was dealt with as a misdeclaration only, and a nominal penalty imposed. There will doubtless be a marked diminution in cases such as those mentioned above, if, and when, the Bill prohibiting the sale of plumage and skins of certain birds, which is at present before the House of Commons, becomes law. But there seems little hope of stamping out altogether this nefarious traffic, so long as the vicious taste for wearing feathers and skins of birds by the fair sex in their headgear continues. 'Women,' says Mr. Buckland, 'have come down through the ages as embodied mercy, tenderness and compassion. Sculptors have represented her with the deep, maternal breast against which tearful little children nestle for succour and comfort. Painters have depicted the poor and the oppressed fleeing to her for refuge from cruelty and wrong. Writers have given her the semblance of Venus, the peerless goddess, who, because of her solicitude for the birds, would not permit victims to be offered her or her altars to be stained with blood. 'What a travesty of this, the world's reverent ideal of womanhood, is the befeathered Herodias of modern times! Is there in the wide world a more repugnant anomaly than the spectacle of modern woman— claiming to be more tender than man—transformed, at the beck of fashion, into a creature heedlessly destructive of bird life, and in practice as bloodthirsty as the most sanguinary beast of prey? It cannot be said in apology for her sin that she errs in ignorance. So much has been written and said about the brutal methods by which her feathers are obtained that the old subterfuges have become too battered to stand. Even those soothing emollient she was wont to apply to her conscience, "artful" and "moulted", have become too impaired by constant refutations to be of further service. She knows, no one better, that art cannot reproduce a feather, and she would toss her head in high disdain if asked to wear a moulted plume.' It would be interesting to know how the practice of wearing plumes and feathers for ornamental purposes originally arose, but it is without doubt of very ancient date. It is one of those relics of remote ages—akin to some superstitions in the religions of modern times—which in spite of its disastrous effects, still lingers, and is an outrage on every feeling of

52

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

humanity. Through countless generations, man has been persistently shaking off all traces of his barbaric ancestors, and when the progress made by him is closely scrutinised, even after this enormous lapse of time, it is surprising to find that faint traces of his ancient customs still adhere to him with a wonderful tenacity. Times are, however, changing; powerful Ornithologists' Unions are at work; and the feeling is growing stronger daily that our feathered friends must be protected at all costs. Nothing short of an international law will, perhaps, ever accomplish this; but it is obvious that Governments can no longer countenance so pernicious a trade, the sole object of which is to minister for a short space of time to female vanity, or gratify the passing freak of a summer fashion at the cost of an enormous sacrifice of life. At the present time feathers, skins and other such like tawdries satisfy the demands of millinery, but when these fail who would be bold enough to prophesy that insects with bizarre and fantastic shapes, or exotic butterflies with gorgeous colouring will not next be called into requisition to meet the demands of a new fashion? The attention of Governments of the day will doubtless then be drawn to the preservation of other species by zealous entomologists pressing for legislation in a fresh direction. But to return to the subject. It seems clear from the measures already taken that India is no longer a haunt for dealers of birds' skins and feathers, and it is high time now that they realized their precarious positions. We take this opportunity of suggesting that no heed should be paid to deputations and memorials urging absurd and frivolous objections, such as birds dropping their feathers naturally, or millions of people being deprived of their means of livelihood, or the prohibitions not affording the least protection to birds, etc. The points which strike us as deserving of further consideration by Governments are: (i) To prohibit the export of plumage from one India port to another (vide the Burma case of 1909-1910). (ii) To prohibit the possession in India of birds' skins and feathers, except in reasonable quantities for personal use or for scientific purposes only. This, it is thought, is the only measure which will ever put an end to the illicit trade so far as India is concerned

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

53

at all events. For as long as there is a demand for feathers and skins, smuggling is bound to continue. In conclusion, we venture to express a hope, and we feel confident that all true sportsmen and naturalists in India will join us that Government will never be induced, even by the doctrine of noninterference with trade which is the only argument that can reasonably be urged, ever to relax the prohibition in respect of plumage, etc., now in force. Even the most impartial student of this question could not help but view with feelings of dismay and apprehension, the consequences of any such relaxation. For the trade which is now practically extinct would spring into renewed activity, and while causing lasting and irreparable injury by bringing about the extermination of large number of species of birds, would eventually end by killing itself by destroying that on which it subsisted. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 20 (1910-11), pp. 1103-14.

What an article! Dodsworth was a real fighter and I am certain that his interventions minimized the damage to a diverse range of species. This is another example of the detailed work done on an issue and is probably the first serious research on trafficking. Again much for today's NGOs to learn from. The trade must have been enormous and the forests rich; and we need to peep into the life and work of those who were in the forest service. Let us also take a look at how the habitat was. It is about the same time that Sainthill Eardley-Wilmot, a former inspector general of forests in the Government of India, wrote his book Forest Life and Sport in India. A small collection of his writings reveals much about the work of the forest officers in India and the beginning of the forest service. He was one of the first officers to have worked under the 1878 Indian Forest Act— the bible for forest officers even today. An extract follows: The Work of the Inspector General of Forests To comprehend the administration of the State Forests of India, it will be necessary to give a short sketch of the machinery of the Indian

54

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Government. The Empire is ruled by a permanent Executive Council, aided by a more numerous body of nominated Councillors, the whole under the presidency of the Viceroy and Governor General, who holds the portfolio of Foreign Affairs. The other Executive Councillors are the Commander-in-Chief and the Ministers for the Home, Finance, Legislative, Industry and Commerce, and Revenue and Agriculture Departments. Finance and Legislation are administered by officers appointed alternately from England and from amongst the members of the Indian Civil Service; while the heads of the other departments are as a rule recruited from that Service. In each department are Secretaries, who also, with a very few exception, derive their origin from the Indian Civil Service. Each department is divided into branches, and these, in cases where special expert knowledge is deemed to be requisite, are presided over by officials who have the requisite training, either in England or through Indian experience. The heads of these branches, who as a rule are not members of the Indian Civil Service, communicate their advice to the Secretary of the department, who takes final orders from the Minister concerned, or, in case of disagreement between departments, from the Governor General in Council. State Forestry in India is controlled by the Department of Revenue and Agriculture, and the Inspector General of Forests is the expert in charge of its Forest Branch. But he has also other duties outside the scope of that department. On him rests the initiative and control in the matter of forest education, and he is responsible for the correctness of the silvicultural proposals that are prepared under the orders of the Conservators for transmission to the Local Governments. Thus, not only is his advice demanded on all forest questions that are brought before the Government of India, but his orders are required in all matters affecting the professional treatment of the forests. In either case he is open to a salutary criticism which absence of local knowledge on his part would render peculiarly effective, and it is therefore of the utmost importance that he should acquire as intimate an acquaintance as possible with the varying conditions that obtain throughout the Peninsula. In respect of the two Provinces of Bombay and Madras, ruled by Governors appointed in England, and subject to only a general control of policy by the Government of India,

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

55

such acquaintance was difficult to obtain; for the Inspector General could only visit these Provinces by special invitation of their Governments, and he received their silvicultural and other reports for information, and not for orders. The efficiency of any Service is based on various conditions, and perhaps the most important of these is the maintenance of a high moral standard; but it becomes difficult to insist on this standard unless adequate protection is afforded at least against lapses that are directly referable to unavoidable financial distress; and if such protection is withheld, relaxations of principle may occur that constitute a danger to official prestige, and easily lead to felonies punishable by the law. The grant of a salary calculated to meet the expenses of a public officer who is forced to live up to a certain social status should be therefore a primary consideration with his employers, but when taking steps to insure the payment of such salaries other points of interest are speedily brought to notice. We are, for instance, often too ready with accusations of corruption and expressions of abhorrence with regard to the acceptance of illegal gratifications by Indians, without considering the difference between the standard of probity created by the British Government and that customary in the country before its arrival. With us, so-called illegal gratifications are penal, because such are rightly held to affect the impersonal service required by the State and the justice of its decisions; we expect an official to refrain from commerce, from speculation, from anything that may divert his attention from public to private interests; we make this condition of his service, and punish, not only any breach of contract, but also those who are accessory thereto. Under native rule the case was widely different; then salaries were often held to be the least part of the emoluments, and, indeed, appointments to onerous and responsible posts were often purchased, and it is but fifty years since the H.E.I.C. both ruled the country and exploited it to its own advantage. The time-honoured system of the past has to give way to the sterner morality of the present day, yet an Indian (not a Government official, who by accepting office has contracted not to increase his income by forbidden methods) sees no degradation, no dishonour, in adhering to an ancient custom, even though he may recognize the theoretical

56

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

superiority of the new regime; and where this regime is not in force he continues the customs of his forefathers. Sainthill Eardley-Wilmot, Forest Life and Sport in India.

We are still at work trying desperately to improve the working conditions of the forest staff and attempting to reform the service. The inspector general has become the director general but the poor forest service—it has now been relegated to oblivion. Finance departments still destroy the reform and recruitment process. Wilmot probably did not realize it but his time was the golden era for the forest service. The population of India is now over a billion and the pressures on forest land enormous, but the problems described by Wilmot a century ago remain pretty much the same today. In the conclusion Wilmot stated: Finally, as to sport in India, in so far as the forest is concerned, the time has already arrived when bitterness and jealousies are not uncommon, as a perusal of correspondence in the daily press will show. And this is but natural when the Government has been forced to interfere to protect from promiscuous slaughter the interesting fauna of the country. At present no one can shoot in Government forests without first purchasing a licence that defines the area placed at the sportsman's disposal, the number and kind of animals he may kill; and in the midst of the eager applications for these licences the Forest Officer may find himself entirely cut off from sport in the area under his charge, or be afraid to fire a shot, lest he should be encroaching on territory leased to another. So much is this the case that more than one Forest Officer has laid aside gun and rifle entirely, so as to have a freer hand in the issue of licences and in the decision of disputes that may arise amongst others—a distinctly humourous result of game laws that add to the duties of the forester, that of gamekeeper, and deprive him of one of the most popular incentives to a forester career. As a rule, the man who passes his life amongst the big game attacks it in his youth, with the ferocity born of primeval instincts and of novelty. As he grows older he becomes more merciful, till at

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

57

last intimate acquaintance conduces to sympathetic affection. He may still feel his blood boil with the excitement of a tiger-hunt, for here is a pastime that never stales with its monotony, provided that man and tiger meet with some pretence of equality; but, for the rest, the wild beasts afford a companionship that is fully recognized in the feeling of solitude experienced when living in a forest devoid of animal life. To read by day on the ground the circumstances and occupations of his neighbours, to interpret by night the cries that tell of their passions and dangers, supplies that added interest which brings vigour to the continuous labour of the forester. For that labour he will find his reward in the generous response of the forest to his fostering care, and in results that will endure for generations after he has completed the short work of a lifetime. Sainthill Eardley-Wilmot, Forest Life and Sport in India.

The 1887 Wild Birds Protection Act was a m e n d e d and repealed in 1912. The Wild Bird and Animals Protection Act (VIII of 1912) replaced it to put the interests of wildlife on the agenda of the country for the first time ever. The new Act and its various amendments must have created an atmosphere that inspired many to write. One of these writers was a forest officer called E.P. Stebbing who, in a book published in 1920 entitled The Diary of a Sportsman Naturalist in India, states some of the most far-reaching thoughts for saving and governing wildlife. He goes into great detail about the economic value of fauna and then into what must have been some of the first strong utterances about creating a sanctuary. What Stebbing was really doing was forcing the prioritization of both the forest and wildlife issue by going into the details of the economic value in order to get attention and political will. It is amazing that this was early in the last century. I do much the same even today as he was doing nearly eighty years ago. E.P. Stebbing wove a path through his writings in order to minimize the effects of poaching and his attempt was to create inviolate tracts or sanctuaries, since he felt there was an urgent need for this at the turn of the last century itself! Stebbing deserves extensive quoting:

58

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The Economic Value of the Fauna It has been previously mentioned that the Government of India, as the successors to the former rulers of the country, became the owners of the fauna of the forests and wastelands. This fauna has a very considerable economic value, the realization of which has so far not been apparent. Practically the only pecuniary return as yet achieved has been from the sale of shooting licences to sportsmen. And yet the value of the flesh, horns and skins of the mammals annually killed throughout the country must be very considerable. That there is a ready market has been mentioned and is well known to many. The economic value of these products in all probability runs into many lacs of rupees annually. No steps appear to have been yet taken to tap this source of revenue. And it cannot be tapped until the matter is approached from the proper viewpoint. The mere passing of an Act, and the notification of Regulations under the Act by Local Governments, will not be sufficient to deal adequately with the question. The effective preservation of the mammals, birds and fish of a country as large as India is a matter requiring constant and unremitting attention if they are to be safeguarded. That this matter has not been envisaged from the correct point of view to date is perhaps not surprising. To the old-time sportsman it did not occur. Why should it? The game animals and animals of economic value were in such abundance in the country that the chances of a species becoming exterminated must have appeared remote. The position, as has been shown, is now very different. It is known for a fact that mammals yielding skins of a high commercial value and birds producing plumes are in danger of extinction throughout the world, owing to the cupidity of the commercial firms dealing in such produce. The valuable egret plumes of India are a case in point, the must deer of the Himalaya, and so forth. The trader is no respecter of sex or season if he has a valuable market. Where possible, there is no reason why the trade of a country in this respect should not be maintained. But a trade whose existence depends on the slaughter of animals should be regulated one. It requires to be under supervision in order that a proper need of protection may be

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

59

accorded to the animal. Such supervision in India can only be effectually given by the Supreme Government. It is difficult to understand why the economic value of the fauna of the country as a whole has not been realised. Most people are aware that thefloracontains many species of high economic value, whether as timber, food and medicinal products, or other commercial articles, such as dyes, tannins, grasses, and so forth. Many of these come from the forests. The Forest Officer, for instance, is well aware that timber by no means constitutes the only commercial article which the forest produces. In fact he may be in charge of areas which produce no timber of commercial size at all. His trees may only grow to a size which yields fuel, such as in some of the Punjabi plains forests. But in most cases the fuel is by no means the only saleable article the forests contain. There will be usually what the forester collectively designates 'Minor products'. The Indian forests contain a very large number of these minor products, varying with the variations in the flora and climate. Lac, for instance, is the product of an insect which is now carefully cultivated in blocks of forest in the Central Provinces and elsewhere and yields a handsome revenue in the parts of the country where it thrives. Bamboos are a minor product which the future may see largely needed for the production of paper pulp; for it has been commercially proved that they can be used in the production of classes of this commodity, the demand for which is ever increasing. Other products are grasses, also used in the manufacture of paper and for thatching purposes; canes, tannins, resin, gums, wax, and so forth, are all minor products, the collection of which in the forest is well understood and the sale of which forms a very handsome proportion of the annual sum realized from the Indian forests. These are derivable, all but lac and wax, from the flora of the country. Why has not equal attention been paid to the products which are obtainable from the fauna? Horns, hides, furs, plumes and feathers, and fish of the rivers and streams. There is a good source of revenue here. The horns shed annually by the deer (Cervidae) in the forests throughout the country must represent many thousand tons in weight. It is, however, unusual to find more than a stray horn here and there in jungles where deer are numerous. They are systematically searched for and collected by the neighbouring villagers

60

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and sold in the bazaars. Government realises but little revenue under this head. The Forest Officer has had the duties of gamekeeper added to his other arduous ones in the forest. He issues the permits for shooting; allocates the blocks between the various permit-holders, possibly finding when this distribution has been made that there will be but a small area left in which he may fire a rifle himself. The revenue from the permits goes to Government. But it is a small return for the value of the large number of mammals, birds, and fish killed and sold annually on their property. It has been recognized that the products of the flora belong to the Government and they are collected and sold in the interests of the revenue. The same policy should be extended to cover the products of the fauna. It may be suggested that this could be done by setting up a staff who should have the charge of advising on the best means of collecting the revenue derivable from the fauna as a whole. That, in fact, the fauna should be treated as one of the economic products of the country and that mammals, birds and fishes should only be killed on licence. The case of the sportsman has already been dealt with. His object is to secure pleasure combined with such trophies of the chase as good fortune and his own skill will win by well-understood sporting methods. But the far larger body of individuals interested in the destruction of the fauna of the country are professionals. They kill to sell and their operations should be controlled by the issue of a licence permitting them to kill a certain number of head of the animal named in the permit, before they are taken out of the area in which they are secured. In fact they should be treated on similar lines to those employed in the collection of minor produce from the forests. In the case of the forests the licences would be issued and the royalties collected by the Forest Staff in a manner similar to other forest produce. It would be essential, for the orderly management of these forests under the existing working plans in force, plans which have received the sanction of the Local Governments, that all licences covering operations within the Government forest area should be issued, the licences controlled, and the revenue collected by the Forest Officer. In the case of the areas lying outside the forests in each District the licences would be issued and

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

61

controlled by the Collector. The introduction of the universal licence would, moreover, place the Collector in an easier position with reference to the vexed question of the gun licence for the protection of crops. If animals were shot in the crops the village shikari or villager would have to pay the royalty on the horns, skins and flesh of the animals shot, and the sex and age of these animals would be recorded. An effective check would therefore be set up, for strict investigation could be carried out in cases where the records showed an undue number of animals shot on this pretext in any locality or the neighbourhood of any village—a check which heretofore has been non-existent. An efficient scheme might well be worked out by the Advisory Officer in the District for the protection of crops which would eliminate once and for all the poaching shikari and villager. If some simple procedure as the one here sketched were brought into force it would be unnecessary to set up a separate department to deal with the protection of the fauna and to obtain from it the revenue which is should certainly yield. The strengthening of the staffs in some cases might be necessary and officers who are known to have made a close practical study of the fauna of their province (they would be sportsmen and naturalists and in their own province would be well known) could be chosen and attached to the various districts and forest divisions for the purpose of advising and bringing into force the new regime. Where a number of adjoining districts or forest divisions in a province have a similar fauna and methods of shooting and poaching, one officer would suffice to deal with the whole area, the revenue derivable being paid into the district of forest division concerned. In every case it should be within the power of the Collector or Forest Officer to refuse, or to recommend to a higher authority the refusal, of all licences to kill any mammal, bird or fish whose numbers from whatever cause has so seriously diminished as to lead to the fear that the species might deteriorate or become extinct within the area. Fish in the inland waters should be treated on similar lines to mammals and birds. Poaching should be firmly put down. The use of the dynamite charge has resulted in far larger numbers of fish being killed than was possible in former lines, with much less trouble to the poacher. All

62

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

professional fishermen should be made to take out licences permitting them to ply their vocation and should pay a royalty on the catch. It is believed that the proper realization of the economic value of the fauna of India and its exploitation under proper regulations would result in a considerable revenue being derived. The Preservation of the Indian Land Fauna as a Whole The Permanent Sanctuary In a preceding chapter we have discussed the Game Sanctuary from the point of view of the preservation of animals of sporting interest, i.e., of those usually termed Game Animals. I now propose to deal briefly with Sanctuary regarded from the aspect of the preservation of the fauna of a particular area or country as a whole. A Sanctuary formed for such a purpose requires to have a permanent character. In other words, the area should be permanently closed to shooting and to all and every interruption to the ordinary habits of life of the species to be preserved. It will be obvious at once that Sanctuaries of this nature and their management will differ widely in different parts of the world. In some cases the only prescriptions would probably relate to shooting, poaching, egg collection, and so forth. It would be unnecessary to close the areas entirely to man. In others, however, it is certain that some of the larger and shier animals and birds, and, I believe, certain classes of insects and so forth, can only be preserved from inevitable extinction if Permanent Sanctuaries of considerable extent are maintained, solely with the object of safeguarding the species for which they are created. In Sanctuaries of this class it will not be merely sufficient to forbid shooting. It will be necessary to close them to man altogether, to leave them, in other words, in their primeval condition, to forbid the building of roads or railways through their vastnesses, to prevent the Forest Department from converting the areas into well-ordered blocks of forest managed for commercial purposes; in fact to prevent in them all and every act of man. In every case throughout the world such Sanctuaries will require to be under supervision, but such supervision should be entirely confined to a police supervision to prevent poaching, collecting, and any entrance by man into the area.

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

63

In a previous chapter I alluded to the Presidential Address delivered by Dr. P. Chalmers Mitchell, F.R.S., Secretary of the Zoological Society, in London, before the British Association in Dundee in 1912. Dr. Chalmers Mitchell was the first, I believe, to enunciate this theory of a Sanctuary for the preservation, not merely of animals whose protection from extinction was considered necessary either from their sporting or economic value, but of the fauna as a whole. He quite correctly pointed out that my paper, read before the Zoological Society in November, 1911, only dealt with the former aspects of the question. After discussing the position of Europe in respect of the diminution of extinction of animals which were abundant in the past the author comes to India. 'India contains,' he says, 'the richest, the most varied, and, from many points of view, the most interesting part of the Asiatic fauna. Notwithstanding the teeming human population it has supported from time immemorial, the extent of its area, its dense forests and jungles, its magnificent series of river valleys, mountains, and hills have preserved until recent times a fauna rich in individuals and species.' After pointing out that the books of sportsmen show how abundant game animals were forty years ago, he continues: 'The one-horned rhinoceros has been nearly exterminated in Northern India and Assam. The magnificent gaur, one of the most splendid of living creatures, has been almost killed off throughout the limits of its range—Southern India and the Malay Peninsula. Bears and wolves, wild dogs and leopards are persecuted remorselessly. Deer and antelope have been reduced to numbers that alarm even the most thoughtless sportsmen, and wild sheep and goats are being driven to the utmost limits of their range.' After alluding to the diminution of animals in other countries, and especially game animals and those killed for economic reasons, the author continues: 'And to us who are Zoologists, the vast destruction of invertebrate life, the sweeping out, as forests are cleared and the soil tilled, of innumerable species that are not even named or described is a real

64

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

calamity. I do not wish to appeal to sentiment. Man is worth many sparrows; he is worth all the animal population of the globe, and if there were not room for both, the animals must go. I will pass no judgement on those who find the keenest pleasure of life in gratifying the primeval instinct of sport. I will admit that there is no better destiny for the lovely plumes of a rare bird than to enhance the beauty of a beautiful woman ... But I do not admit the right of the present generation to careless indifference or to wanton destruction. Each generation is the guardian of the existing resources of the world; it has come into a great inheritance, but only as a trustee. We are learning to preserve the relics of early civilizations, and the rude remains of man's primitive arts and crafts. Every civilized nation spends great sums on painting and sculpture, on libraries and museums. Living animals are of older lineage, more perfect craftsmanship, and greater beauty than any of the creations of man. And although we value the work of our forefathers, we do not doubt but that the generations yet unborn will produce their own artists and writers of the past. But there is no resurrection or recovery of an extinct species, and it is not merely that here and there one species out of many is threatened, but that whole genera, families, and orders are in danger.' There still remains, then, the problem of carrying the preservation of animals the one stage further to include the whole fauna—in a word, the formation of Fauna Sanctuaries. Their creation so as to include some of the most interesting of the fauna is still possible in India, e.g., in that fascinating tract stretching from Assam down into Burma. I am so entirely in sympathy with Dr. Mitchell's opinions on this question that I will quote his concluding remarks before the Association: 'There are in all the great continents large tracts almost empty of resident population, which still contain vegetation almost undisturbed by the ravages of man and which still harbour a multitude of small animals, and could afford space for the larger and better known animals. These tracts have not yet been brought under cultivation, and are rarely traversed except by the sportsman, the explorer, and the prospector. On these there should be established, in all the characteristic faunistic areas, reservations which should not be merely temporary recuperating grounds for harassed game, but absolute Sanctuaries. Under no condition should they be opened to the sportsmen. No gun should be fired, no animal

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

65

slaughtered or captured save by the direct authority of the wardens of the Sanctuaries, for the removal of noxious individuals, the controlling of species that were increasing beyond reason, the extirpation of diseased or unhealthy animals. The obvious examples are not the game reserves of the Old World, but the National Parks of the New World and Australasia. In the United States, for instance, there are now the Yellowstone National Park with over two million acres, the Yosemite in California with nearly a million acres, the Grand Canon Game Preserve, with two million acres, the Mount Olympus National Monument in Washington with over half a million acres, as well as number of smaller reserves for special purposes, and a chain of coastal areas all around the shores for the preservation of birds. In Canada, in Alberta, there are the Rocky Mountains Park, the Yoho Park, Glacier Park, and Jasper Park, together extending to over nine million acres, whilst in British Columbia there are smaller Sanctuaries. These, so far as laws can make them, are inalienable and inviolable Sanctuaries for wild animals. We ought to have similar Sanctuaries in every country of the world, national parks secured for all time against all the changes and chances of the nations by international agreement. In the older and more settled countries the areas selected unfortunately must be determined by various considerations, of which faunistic value cannot be the most important. But certainly in Africa and in large parts of Asia, it would still be possible that they should be selected in the first place for their faunistic value. The scheme for them should be drawn up by an international commission of experts in the geographical distribution of animals, and the winter and summer haunts of migratory birds should be taken into consideration. It is for zoologists to lead the way, by laying down what is required to preserve for all time the most representative and most complete series of surviving species without any reference to the extrinsic value of the animals. And it then will be the duty of the nations, jointly and severally, to arrange that the requirements laid down by the experts shall be complied with.' To the thoughtful man this lucid exposition of the case places the whole problem in a nutshell.

66

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

I think the concluding extract from Dr. Chalmers Mitchell's paper is one of the highest importance both in its wider sense and in the more confined one as regards India. Sanctuaries such as above sketched are the only possible method of saving from extinction the rhinoceros, bison or gaur, and buffalo, to take three of the best known of the big game animals requiring protection in India. But these Sanctuaries require to be left in their state of primeval forest. They cannot be treated as commercial forests managed from a revenue-making point of view by the Forest Department. The most scientific arrangements for opening and closing the blocks of forest as they come up in rotation for felling and other operations will not avail to make such areas true Sanctuaries. I have an idea that some of the areas in America and Canada alluded to above by Dr. Chalmers Mitchell are Sanctuaries which it is proposed to treat as revenue-giving forests. If this is the case they will not remain Sanctuaries for a certain proportion of the fauna they at present contain. There can be little doubt that as it is with some of the shier mammals so must it be with a proportion of other forms of animal life living in the forests. They can be preserved from extinction in an area of primeval forest left untouched by man and maintained in its original condition. Amongst insects it is, I think, probable that some of the forest members of the longicorn, buprestid, brenthid and bark-boring beetles (Scolylidae), to mention but four families, many species of which are still probably unknown to science, will disappear with the cleaning up of the forests and their systematic management by the Forest Department. My point is that I am in complete agreement with Dr. Mitchell in his contention that the Sanctuary, the large, permanent Sanctuary, should not be regarded merely as a harbour for animals of game or economic interest, but that it should be formed in the interests of the fauna as a whole. I would, however, add to this the rider that in the case of the large Sanctuaries required to preserve from extinction animals either of a naturally roving disposition or of very shy habits the prohibition to entry should not be confined to the sportsmen alone or to man generally outside the officials connected with the area. But further, that it should

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

67

be recognized that in order to realize the objects aimed at it should be rigidly laid down that no working of any kind can take place within the Permanent Sanctuary. That in other words a Permanent Sanctuary does not fall within the boundaries of any area worked by Government officials, either for profit or other reasons, on behalf of the Government. Officials would be appointed to supervise the Sanctuary, but their duties would be confined to policing the area in order that the objects for which it was created might be realized to the full.' E.P. Stebbing, The Diary of a Sportsman Naturalist in India.

And I can fully understand the need for sanctuaries at that moment of time. The last fifty years had seen devastation. As Mahesh Rangarajan puts it: 'Over 80,000 tigers, more than 150,000 leopards and 200,000 wolves were slaughtered in 50 years from 1875 to 1925. It is possible this was only a fraction of the numbers actually slain ...' For those who cared, the 1920s and the reflections of the horrors of hunting over the last decades must have given little cause for hope. The 1920s was also a time for great bursts in human populations. This was when the sharpest rise in births took place. Mortality levels were also coming down. The pressures on the forest had increased sharply. By 1926 there were much discussion, dialogue, and debate on 'game' preservation in India. The Bombay Natural History Society played a vital role in triggering the issues of this debate—they wrote to forest officers and sportsmen for their opinions and a series of editorials in the Journal created an awareness of the need for 'conservation'. I think the reason for this was the state of game—of wildlife in general. Again, there was much discussion about the concept of a sanctuary and its feasibility. Many issues were discussed, much as we discuss today, but in 1927 few believed that the time had come to create protected areas. I have edited a selection of writings during this period to provide a glimpse of what must have been a critical turning point in the history of both the forest and wildlife. In 1926 an editorial in the Journal of the BNHS summarized the important issues regarding preservation.

68

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Game Preservation (Editorial) ... It is as a poacher that man is the great destroyer. In considering how to deal with the problem of the native who kills game, the first thing to be considered is his reason for doing it, and three reasons immediately appear. These are first for profit, in order that he may sell the meat, hide and horns, and this would appear by far, the most common one. The second is, for the meat only, and this is not so common. The third reason, is to protect his crops, and no one can possibly complain of an agriculturist in any part of the world protecting his property in such a way. The increase in number of gun licences issued has had a most fatal influence on the existence of game in many districts. It is not that the licences themselves have done the actual damage, but that they have a habit of lending or hiring out their weapons to others. In many cases it is the custom for dear old Indian gentlemen whose figure puts out of the question their personally taking an active part in hunting, to send out their retainers with a gun to kill game for them, regardless of season, sex or size; and there is no doubt that by stopping this abuse of a gun licence granted as a personal privilege, much game would be saved. It is very often for the purpose of such household use that gun licences are applied for. Such action would not however affect the poacher who poaches for pecuniary profit, and from a larger number of the letters received, it is evident that the buyer is the person to get at. The formation of sanctuaries is the principle point on which the letters differ. Where recommended the suggestion is always qualified by the remark that they are expensive; as, to be effective, they must be well guarded by unbribable Game Warden, and this is put forward as an insuperable objection by several. The majority are of the opinion that existing Reserved Forests are sufficient sanctuaries in themselves, and the general consensus of opinion is that the licence holder is of considerable assistance in Game preservation. In this connection it might

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

69

be remembered what has happened on nullahs being closed in Kashmir for a long period as sanctuaries: they have almost invariably been found almost empty of Game on being reopened, closing them having proved to benefit the poacher only. This is the almost inevitable fate of any sanctuary in India unless unbribable game watchers are found at very high rates of pay. As there is no prospect of such paragons ever being discovered without expenditure of money never likely to be available, the provision of sanctuaries may be relegated to the dim future. There is again the effect of preservation on the Forest itself. Bison and Sambhar both do a great deal of damage to young teak and other valuable timber trees, and must be kept within bounds. A sanctuary to be effective must be big, and there are few places where the Forest Department can afford to set aside a large tract of forest as a sanctuary. One correspondent draws attention to the balance being upset in another direction, and gives figures to support his contention that tigers have taken to man-eating much more of late years in the Northern Circars owing to the decrease in their natural food, namely deer, at the hands of poachers. To summarize the impression gained from the letters read it appears that what is principally needed is a law forbidding the sale of any part of a big game animal (carnivora excepted) save by a Forest Officer in the public interest. An adequate penalty to be enforced. Secondly that the use of a gun except by the licence holder in person be strictly forbidden and penalties exacted. It only remains for us to accord our most grateful thanks to all those who have answered our letters and for the care and trouble they have taken in doing so. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 31 (1926), pp. 803-04.

And there must have been endless discussions on new concepts. The Nilgiri Game Association of 1879 also assessed the prevailing state of affairs:

70

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The Preservation in the Nilgiris by Major E.G. Phythian-Adams, I .A. (Retd.) The Nilgiri Game Association was formed in 1879, and is therefore one of the oldest societies for Game Preservation in India. The mass of the Nilgiri plateau intercepts the monsoon currents and accordingly one side receives heavy rain from the south-west monsoon while the other obtains little except from the north-east. This climatic variation considerably affects both the nesting seasons of birds and the times when the deer, more especially chital, may be found in hard horn. At the time of the formation of the Association in 1879 as the result of considerable Press agitation, big game was fast approaching extinction on the plateau. The butchers of that period knew no restriction of age, sex, or season, and slaughtered alike doves, fawns, and stags in velvet. Poaching is inevitable and all that can be done is to mitigate the evil as far as possible. The N.G.A. has for many years and at considerable expense maintained a staff of seventeen game watchers, but as they were found to be quite useless, they were abolished in 1926, and their duties taken over by ordinary Forest Guards, a special sum being set aside by the N.G.A. for rewards for reporting cases. The N.G.A. is much hampered by the amount of private Patta land in the area, over which it has no control, and on which shooting takes place without restriction throughout the year. Since the revision of the Indian Arms Act a few years ago the number of licenced weapons has increased enormously, and there is, unfortunately no doubt that poaching into Reserved Forests is far more common than it used to be. What is needed is an Act to protect the females of deer at all times, and game birds during the nesting-season equally on private as on public land. The Forest Rangers and their assistants in this district now receive free shooting licences, and if they will fully realize their responsibilities in the matter of Game Preservation, much might be effected. Certain areas on the plateau are closed to shooting either big or small game, and others to beating, and it is proposed to close next year to all shooting a considerable area in the centre of the plateau to acclimatize imported Jungle-fowl and Burmese Pheasants. For many years the large

THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY

71

tract on the west of the plateau known as the Kundahs has been closed to all beating and small game shooting. It was re-opened this season, but there is no appreciable increase in the number or size of heads in the case of Sambur, nor in the number of small game. The Kundahs are uninhabited and seldom visited except by an occasional sportsman or by men grazing herds of cattle. Its southern edge is no doubt poached to a certain extent by the jungle Kurrumbas from the Bhavani Valley, but they do not penetrate far above the cliffs. The poor results obtained seem to show that a long period of protection in the same area is a mistake, and that closed areas should not be kept as such for more than a few years. General—-The present condition of game in the area is satisfactory, but the greatly increased number of licenced and unlicenced weapons in the hands of Patta-land shooters renders necessary stricter supervision than formerly, and an Act to regulate the sale of big game throughout the year, with severe penalties for the use of a gun except by a licenceholder in person. Unless some such steps on the lines indicated are taken at an early date, the head of game in the area will diminish rapidly, and no longer afford alike to the resident and to the visitor the sport that it does at present. Lovedale, Nilgiris March 3, 1927. It is quite clear that at the turn of the century India had spiralled into a wildlife crisis. World War I had also taken its toll on India's rich timber supply. The guns were more advanced and motor car had made its entry. With accelerating crisis came strident calls from urgent conservation and now started a remarkable period of 'battling' to save the wilds.

Ill A Critical Period 1927-1947

T

he period between 1927 and 1937 was in a way fascinating because there was a remarkable spurt in writing and about what was considered as a rapidly developing wildlife crisis. The Indian Forest Act (XIV of 1927) had just been enacted with new rules and guidelines. The human population was growing rapidly a n d the first w a v e s of i n f r a s t r u c t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t w e r e accelerating, especially the railway network, and with it came the endless demands for wooden sleepers. Forests were cut rapidly. Discussions about shooting rules, closed and open seasons, the creation of game preservation societies, protection of monitor lizards, and how different regions should create new laws to protect species, became frequent. I think one of the primary reasons for this was the development of the motor car and the laying of roads. This caused havoc to wildlife since forests became easily accessible to many, and cars fitted with lights or specially designed hunting cars that were made for the maharajas, entered the forests in great numbers. Wildlife had little chance. Hunting records accelerated. Four tigers in one night was the norm. By 1929, just outside Bombay, which was the headquarters of the BNHS, a tiger that had swum in from the Thane creek was shot dead. This was also the last recorded tiger shot or seen in Bombay.

1 The plunders of the past—hundreds of ducks lined up after just one shoot.

• An elephant in the process of trampling a tiger to death after it had been severely injured.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

73

In nearby Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) there were also serious concerns about the state of wildlife. People like Dunbar Brander wrote on the problems of wildlife in the Central Provinces and this was again a moment to re-discuss the creation of sanctuaries and national parks. The debates raged on; Brander went to the extent of giving a detailed outline for a 'Valley Reserve'. S.H. Prater wrote of the problems of wildlife both in India and across the world, and Milroy, a forest officer from Assam wrote on the serious problems that afflicted that region. Champion wrote of the concerns of wildlife in the United Provinces, and in a way a bunch of forest officers across India who loved the wilderness were revealing by the mid-thirties the severity of the crisis that was enveloping them. At this time Cadell wrote on the predicament of the Indian lion, and by 1935 a major conference was organized to discuss the problems that plagued Indian wildlife. It must have been the first of its kind. Richmond wrote on the Madras Presidency, Salim Ali on the Hyderabad State, Phythian-Adams on Mysore, and Jepson on wildlife preservation in India. This, in my opinion, is one of the first records of an Indian, Salim Ali, getting involved with the process of conservation. It was, as I said earlier, a burst of concern for what was going on. It led to the first journal on Indian wildlife being edited by Corbett, which was called Indian Wildlife, Official Organ of the All India Conference for the Preservation of Wildlife, and it was born after the conference in 1935. This was the 'wild bunch' in a major battle to save India's wildlife. They were activated like never before. For them the future must have looked bleak. In a way this was one of the most turbulent periods in the history of Indian wildlife and a collection of articles, letters, and comments about this period is reproduced here: Game Preservation in India by The Editors Game Preservation wherever it may be undertaken embodies the same principle—the principle that, in order to afford game animals that peace and protection which will enable them to live and reproduce their kind

74

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

without damage to man, man should only be allowed to damage them under certain rules and should be restricted from ruthless destruction. How is this principle applied in India? Let us take first the factors which adversely affect the existence of game and then consider the remedies or lack of remedies. Firstly as a settler, by clearing the forest and wastelands and driving the game away from its natural habitat; secondly as a destroyer, by protecting his own preserves from intrusion yet pursuing animal life within the vastnesses of its retreat. Disease is a second adverse factor to be reckoned with; rinderpest has accounted for a large number of bison and buffalo in Peninsular India, while foot and mouth disease has in recent years seriously affected game animals in Kashmir and Himalayan ranges. A third adverse factor might be said to be the killing of game by predatory animals, yet this factor we might set down as a natural check on over-increase, and unless the balance of nature has been upset by extraneous causes its effect on game as a whole is not considerable. The remedy against man would appear to be obvious, namely the provision of extensive areas of absolute wilderness affording harbourage to wild life, and so long as there are refuges safeguarded by their very nature against usurpation by man so long will wildlife thrive and maintain its existence, provided there is no epidemic disease. In India the possession of such areas has been one of the main factors tending to the protection of its wild fauna and there should be little danger, for the present, of any of the existing species being exterminated. Viewed as a whole, therefore, the present condition of game in India would appear decidedly good—but for how long will this status be maintained? In some parts of the country, as in the Central Provinces, there has already been serious depletion and in other areas there is an almost complete disappearance of game. In making a plea for the protection of the wild fauna of the country we must urge that apart from the purely sympathetic motives which should impel man to permit to lesser creatures the right of existence there are other, perhaps less worthy and more material, thoughts and motives which are worth considering. These reasons are put forth on the assumption of course that animal life is worth preserving somewhere.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

75

From the scientific standpoint there are innumerable investigations— anatomical, physiological, ecological, geographic, taxonomic and evolutionary, which can only be made from the study of animal life. Biology has already produced many conceptions of practical and educational value. The role of the parasite, the predator, the scavenger, in the economic web of life has, besides its purely educative significance, a not wholly useless application to social relations. And what about the purely economic aspect? Even predatory animals have a distinct value as a controlling influence against over-population by species whose unrestricted increase would adversely affect the interests of man. Again there is the utilization for man's benefit of animal products, such as furs, hides and horns, which in themselves present a valuable economic asset and are in themselves a plea for the conservation of the sources of supply. Have these economic possibilities been exhausted? A few years ago Insulin, that priceless boon to the diabetic, was discovered in the liver of a shark. Who knows what animal products yet remain to be discovered which will be of priceless value to man? The principle of conservation being admitted, what are the methods to be employed? The principle is the same in every country, the methods to be employed must vary in every country and will probably vary in different parts of the same country. Let us consider some of the different methods of conservation in vogue in different parts of India. In the United Provinces shooting rules close and open shooting blocks for altogether fortnights. This system provides and ensures fortnightly periods of constantly recurring rest. In the Terai type of jungles, where shooting blocks are small and game can be very thoroughly disturbed by a line of elephants beating them day after day, the system is an absolute necessity. In the Central Provinces the forests are parcelled out into shooting blocks usually of a large size. One block, usually a central one, being reserved as a Sanctuary; this, coupled with the extensive size of the blocks, secures game from undue disturbances. There is here, and in other parts of India also, a strict limit to the kind and number of animals which may be shot in a given block, and, in addition, an individual limit is imposed on all sportsmen whether exempted from permits or not.

76

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

In Southern India the game laws are not applicable to the various provinces as a whole and in certain areas no game laws exist. The Nilgiri Districts and those parts of Coimbatore and Malabar which are so effectively controlled by the Nilgiri Game Association are the only areas with special laws excepting the areas known as reserved forests where the number of animals that may be shot is controlled by licence. The position as regards game in Assam is simple; here the game areas are divided into wastelands, reserve forests, and hill forests. The immense areas of wasteland which existed at one time are now being rapidly cultivated by immigrant settlers or used as grazing lands by an invasion of buffalo-keepers, Nepalese, so that game in these lands is rapidly losing ground. In reserve forests shooting is controlled by licence. For the better protection of rhinos, large areas of grass and swamp land have been included in these reserves and treated as sanctuaries. In the hill forest areas conditions are steadily approaching those obtaining in wastelands where an increasing human population is gradually driving game from its quondam preserves. Whilst game in Assam will be less and less exempt from molestation as cultivation approaches forest boundaries, it must be admitted that there is little danger of game in Assam becoming extinct for a great many years so long as extensive forests continue to exist and to provide safe harbourage to game. The conditions prevailing in Assam may be applied to India as a whole. On broad principles land may be classified in three main zones— urban areas, agricultural areas, and forest and waste areas. As far as animal life is concerned we cannot expect its preservation in urban lands. Cultivated areas with their domestic animals and crops provide at once an opportunity for conflict between man's interests and those of the wild species, and in such land the plea for protection cannot carry weight. We come finally to forest areas and wastelands where, as shown, excellent laws suited to local conditions have been framed for protection of wildlife, yet nevertheless game is decreasing where once it abounded. Existing game laws are excellent in themselves but it is in their efficient application that the trouble arises. As far as the agency of man is concerned there is no mystery attached to the causes of trouble. Firstly while the licence holder is restricted by the terms of his licence from doing undue damage, the poacher is affected by no law. He slaughters indiscriminately

I

A CRITICAL PERIOD

77

everything that he sets his eyes upon, regardless of sex, age, or season, he sits over saltlicks and waterholes, indulges in night shooting and does all that he should not do. Secondly emphasis must be laid on the great increase in recent years in the number of gun licences issued which increase is producing, and will continue increasingly to produce, its inevitable effect on game in forest areas and lands immediately adjoining. Thirdly there is a mass of unlicensed guns carefully concealed but constantly used, and there is also the loaning of fire arms by accommodating licensees to friends and retainers, and finally there are the professional trappers and gangs of men with dogs who slay and devour all that falls before them. Those in control of forest areas cannot be altogether exonerated for the ineffective application of the rules. Conservators of Forests and Divisional Forest Officers are not necessarily interested in game preservation, and in addition there often exists the clash of interests between the sylviculturist and the game protector, for game can do considerable damage to young teak and other valuable forest timbers. If the game in reserved forests and sanctuaries is to be protected a more rigid application of the laws is necessary—the stimulus for which might be obtained by an executive order from above. Much might also be effected by cooperation with the police since every constable is in law 'a forest officer'. A more liberal system of rewards for detection of forest crime, particularly of poaching, is another point worthy of consideration. Rewards are far too rarely given and very rarely indeed in poaching cases; the detection and capture of a poacher who is armed often involves danger and there is no class of forest crime the detection of which merits to a greater extent the granting of reward. It is evident that much of the poaching that is done in forest preserves is carried on for profit. It is significant that the decrease of game in certain areas has corresponded with the increase in the export of skins, principally of bison, buffalo, sambhar, etc. Bison, chital and sambhar hides are openly sold in the bazaars and there is nothing to prevent these sales. If the poacher is deprived of his market the temptation to kill would be largely removed and it would appear that there could be no possible objection to a general law throughout India forbidding the sale by unauthorized persons of

78

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

any portion of big game animals—whether hides, horns or meat and with adequate penalties annexed for those who break the law. As to the question of gun licences, it may be assumed that in 99 cases out of 100 they are not obtained for the purpose for which they are granted as it is the merest fiction to suppose that the guns are used exclusively for crop protection, which is the only legitimate purpose to which they can be put. While the reduction in the number of licences may perhaps be a difficult matter, it would seem a perfectly fair proposition to have all the 'crop protection' guns called in during the hot weather when there are absolutely no crops to protect. It is during the hot weather, when water is so scarce and the jungles are so thin, that 80 per cent of the damage is done. It has been found useful, where gun licences are required solely for crop protection purposes, to have several inches of barrel removed. Lastly a suitable penalty might be imposed for the use of a gun except by the licence holder in person. The formation of suitable game sanctuaries has been proposed by many as a solution. They must be fairly large, must possess a perennial water supply and must as far as possible be protected against fire and, what is most important, they must have a special staff to look after them. Each preserve will require well-paid watchers with a game warden over them—the game warden should be well paid and given considerable preventive powers. The case for the game warden and his special staff is that many forest officials have neither the time nor perhaps the inclination to apply themselves especially to game preservation. The exploitation of timber and forest produce is annually increasing and forest officers find it more and more difficult to get away from work which brings revenue so as to be able to pay sufficient attention to a question which in this material age is considered to be one of subsidiary importance. A game warden requires special qualifications and besides being a sportsman must also be a naturalist with a knowledge of the ways and habits of the animals he is called upon to protect. The objection to the game sanctuary is that it is expensive both as regards the extent of forest land which must be sacrificed for the purpose and as regards its maintenance by well-paid warden and an unbribable staff. Besides it may be maintained that a long period of protection in the same area is probably a mistake. Nullahs maintained as sanctuaries in Kashmir for considerable periods

A CRITICAL PERIOD

79

were found, on reopening them to shooting, to be almost empty of game. Lastly an unbribable staff of subordinate game watchers would be difficult to procure. The Nilgiri Game Association which, at considerable expense, maintained a staff of seventeen game watchers, abolished the system as these were found to be quite useless and their duties have now been taken over by ordinary forest guards. The above article was written originally for publication in the Times of India. As it proved too long for the purpose the Editor of the Times published a resume in a leader which appeared in the paper on July 7. The following note appeared in the Times, London, July 12, in reference to the leader published in Bombay: Any further proposals for preserving game in India as suggested in Bombay are likely to be viewed with the greatest suspicion and disapproval by the cultivating classes. Large game is already carefully preserved in many of the Indian States whose rulers are usually ardent shikaris, and in British India the Forest Department controls most of the game areas. In these, shooting is restricted by the issue of licences and the number of heads that may be bagged. 'The depredations of the larger beasts are one of the most serious handicaps that the ryot has to face. Hundreds of thousands of plough and milch cattle are carried off every year by tiger and panther, while the number of human beings who fall prey to man-eaters is still very considerable. Only last year a man-eater was at large within 50 miles of Madras and was reported to have killed six persons. 'Besides the loss of cattle there is the damage done to crops, which in many parts of India is very extensive. Wild elephants are well known as the most destructive creatures. They will tread down or tear up three or four times the area they eat of such favoured delicacies as cardamoms. It is usually permissible to kill them when they are found doing damage on private land, but it is no easy task to do so. Occasionally a small owner at the foot of the hills may make a lucky coup by digging an elephant pit in his land and capturing a small tusker which is worth more than his field, but in an ordinary way the elephant is looked upon as a sacred nuisance. Wild pigs do a great amount of damage to sugarcane, and many a weary cultivator spends the whole night on a

80

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

"machan" among his canes trying vainly to scare them away with horn and tom-tom. 'One of the most popular of the provisions of the new Arms Act was the reduction in fees for the possession of muzzle-loaders for the protection of crops and the greatly increased facilities for obtaining licences given to the agricultural classes. Previously, when the losses of cattle from tiger or panther became intolerable and there were no guns available, a whole village would turn out with spears, sticks and drums and surrounding "stripes" or "spots" after his meal, would literally poke him to death. 'The cattle mortality returns show no such decrease among them as would justify any further protection of the felines. In fact in the last few years an increase in the number of tiger has been reported in the Godavari Agency.' Game Associations There are already in existence several game associations in the hills which regulate the number of shooting licences issued in the area they control. The Nilgiri Game Association which has been in existence for many years has done very useful work in protecting sambur, bison, etc., and has also spent quite a large sum in stocking rivers with imported trout. Pulini Association, started about 15 years ago, is doing similar good work. Both associations work under the auspices of the Local Government. So long as the innumerable Jheels of Northern India and the tanks of the south receive their supply of water there is no fear of any diminution in the myriads of duck and teal which flock to them every cold weather. The Indian is not likely to change his food supply, and so long as he grows paddy so long will the opportunities for snipe-shooting which India affords be unequalled elsewhere. As cultivation in the dry tracts increases, it is inevitable that the herds of blackbuck and chinkara which roamed over the wastelands in former days should diminish, but there will always be uncultivable areas which

A CRITICAL PERIOD

81

will form a refuge for them as well as for partridge and sandgrouse and the innumerable other small game of the Indian plains. The days are yet far off when anything in the way of a National Park to preserve Indian fauna is either called for or practicable. An extract from the petition of a ryot sums up the present situation: A reserve forest in the proximity of the village is the nursing ground for all sorts of forest beasts, particularly that species of animals that exist by the wild destruction and hasty consumption of the crops of innocent but hard-working farmers. No human endeavour, however ingenious, could scare them away; but if done they come with renewed vigour and far more formidable companions. The declared enemies of the farmer, the cheetahs, the leopards, undertake a perfect crusade against my sheep and goats, more particularly my life-giving bulls and other cattle.' Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 32 (1927), pp. 359-65.

The levels of the debate are fascinating. The 'back and forth' about protected areas, the repeated request for unbribable staff, and the lobbies which were strong and intense, as the hunter did not want to part with his turf even if it were for the creation of a national park. It is clear that at the end of the 1920s there was a tiny minority fighting to create sanctuaries and national parks. The majority, including even those at home in England who called themselves the cultivated classes, wanted only to ensure that they had unrestricted access to the best piece of hunting turf in Asia. They had an enormous vested interest. It was the minority that battled. And thank god for them. Today it is only these protected areas that house remnants of wildlife. The 'wild bunch', eighty years ago, played an extraordinary role in planting the seeds for the protected areas of today. The editors of the BNHS journal did not realize that the day was not far off when India would declare its first national park in order to protect and preserve and minimize the enormous impact of sport hunting that had begun to take a toll on India's wildlife.

82

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Game Preservation (BNHS Annual Report) Attention must be drawn to various articles on Game Preservation in India and Ceylon which have appeared in the Journal. The subject is one of growing importance and is attracting attention in all parts of the Empire. The general consensus of opinion in India is that game sanctuaries, if by such are meant areas within which no shooting is to be allowed, are not the remedy. They will be paradises for poachers. What are wanted are Game Preserve in which shooting under regulation is allowed, and the alienation of Forest land, which is the home of interesting species of Forest Game which would be exterminated were the land put under cultivation, should be prohibited. Our present difficulties are mainly due to the increasing number of officials with no interest in sport or natural history. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 34 (1929), p. 605.

Here is another remarkable description of the prevailing state of affairs. They viewed sanctuaries as a poachers' paradise. They had to deal with officials who had no interest in wildlife. The same malaise plagues us even today. The debate about sanctuaries went on and more and more people came into the fray to write about the regions they loved and the sorry state they were in. Here are some extracts from A. A. Dunbar Brander on the Central Provinces. He was a remarkable forest officer with a vision for the future who was writing then on the preservation of wildlife in India. Good game tracts exist both in Indian States and in British India. The British Government has no jurisdiction over the game in Indian States. Most of the Indian Princes protect game, and there is a growing tendency for this movement to spread and become more vigorous. In most States the laws or rules for the protection of wild animals are effectively enforced. No more need be said about the States. With regard to British India, game is found in country having a different legal status, and this must be differentiated:

A CRITICAL PERIOD

83

(a) Private land (b) State land. Generally speaking, game in (a) has no owner. It belongs neither to the owner of the land nor to the State. The Government, however, has the right to pass laws regulating the slaughter of game, and, in most cases such laws have been passed. I shall refer to this in more detail when dealing with game laws. With regard to State land the great bulk of which consists of Government forest, the State owns the game, and special laws dealing with its protection throughout India have been passed. These laws are administered by the Forest Department. I shall also refer to this in some detail later on. Types of Game Country There are four main types of country in which game is found and which I have designated as follows: 1. Himalayan 2. Terai 3. Central Plateau 4. Southern I left India in 1922 but revisited it in 1928, and was appalled to find such a change in so short a period, quite common species being found only with difficulty. The finest game country in this tract is found in the Central Provinces, and I shall deal at some length with the causes which have brought about his state of affairs in that area, as I believe they have a very wide application. Position of Game on Private Lands As already stated, the game in private lands has no owner. The State has passed laws prohibiting the killing of does and immature animals. To all intents and purposes the laws are a dead letter as there is no preventive staff. The two main preventive services in India are the Police and the

84

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Forest Service. The latter has no jurisdiction outside State forest, and the Police take no interest in enforcing the rules. Prosecutions are very rare, and any interest the local constable may take in the matter would often be to share in the booty. The result is that game has almost disappeared from private lands. The main Bombay-Allahabad line runs through some 200 miles of antelope country. Twenty years ago one was almost constantly in sight of herds. In 1928 in four hours I only saw two small herds, watching from the train. The only fauna left in private lands is a few chital and sambhar in specially favoured localities, pig in considerable numbers, and a sprinkling of antelope, also lesser carnivora. The great mass of the country, however is blank and it will be readily understood that these blank unprotected spaces surrounding Government forests which contain game act as a constant drain on the stock of fauna in the protected lands: there is constant leakage to destruction. In my opinion nothing can save the fauna in these private lands. Its extermination is certain. The people have been educated to destroy it: there is no staff to protect it, and even if the Indian Legislatures could be induced to take measures, financial considerations preclude adequate protection. State Lands: Position of Game These mostly consist of State forests where the Forest Act and the rules made thereunder apply; amongst these are included the rules regulating the killing of game. On the whole, these are excellent, and, although I shall suggest certain stiffening to meet modern conditions, nevertheless it is not in the rules themselves but in their application that failure arises. As regards the European and Indian sportsmen who enter the forest to shoot under permit, the rules are absolutely efficacious, and this type of sportsmen does no harm. Where they fail is in the prevention of poaching. There is lucrative trade in game; the initial detection of poaching often rests with a lowly-paid forest guard. Men possessing guns often command respect, and the guard finds the easiest plan is to take a percentage of the profits. Moreover, too sparingly given, the magistrates' sentences are often quite inadequate.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

85

The Main Reasons why the Destruction of Game has Recently Increased. 1. During the war the rules were relaxed. In certain cases the shooting of does was permitted to make leather jackets for sailors. There was a general activity in the trade in the products of game: tanneries came into being, and what was previously an occasional trade has now become an active competitive one with wide ramifications: a slaughtered deer no longer means merely a gorge of meat for the local aborigines, it is an article of commerce and a valuable one. 2. There has been a very large increase in the number of gun licences issued as well as a large increase in unlicensed or illegal guns. It is easy to see that with a large number of guns legally possessed, the detection of illegal guns becomes more difficult. Be the causes what they may, the State forests are surrounded by guns, many of which are constantly used in destroying game both inside the forest and just outside it. In the present political situation any attempt to regulate the number of guns to actual requirements for crop protection is hopeless. The guns have come, and to stay. 3. The Motor Car—This is perhaps the biggest factor of all, in the disappearance of game, although without the two previous causes its significance would be small. Since the war whole tracts have been opened up—in fact no tract is inviolate—cars penetrating along dirt tracks into country in one day which previously took a week's marching with camels and horses. Every car that moves by day or night has one or more guns in it, and practically every animal seen which presents a fair chance of being killed, without further questions asked, is fired at. Moreover, expeditions go out at night with strong moveable searchlights and shoot down whatever is encountered, and the car enables the booty to be removed. The destruction is terrible. I came across glaring cases during my short three months' trip in 1928. The present game laws were framed before this menace arose, and they require to be reviewed and amended in consequence.

86

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Some Remedial Measures Suggested: 1. An attempt to check the increase of guns, even reduce them. 2. Much stricter control and regulation of tanneries and business trading in wild fauna and its products. 3. Complete review of the rules so as to deal with the motor car amongst other things, and to bring the owner and the driver of any car within the penalties of law-breaking. 4. Press for stiffer sentences in poaching cases and rewards to subordinates detecting the same. These rewards are at present optional, but should be made as a matter of course, save for definite reasons. 5. Establishing associations for the protection of Wildlife and housing enlightened Indian opinion, and enlisting influential men as members of such Societies. Sanctuaries As will be seen from what I have written above, the Himalayan and Terai areas are hardly suitable places, even if required, in which to create National Sanctuaries. With regard to the Central and Southern areas, the case is different. In these tracts they will form a useful and interesting purpose, especially in the former, where the fauna can be readily observed, will readily tame, and be a delight to visitors. My knowledge of the Southern tract does not enable me to suggest any particular area, but as I know every square mile of the Central Provinces I can definitely assert that one area is suited par excellence for a National Park. This is known as the Banjar Valley Reserve. The Banjar Valley Reserve Situation—Situated in the South Mandla Forest Division, 30 miles southeast of Mandla, which is the District Headquarters. Mandla is almost 60 miles, due south of Jabalpur, and served by firstclass road and light railway. There is a fair weather motor road from Mandla to Khana in the centre of the valley.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

87

Maps—Splendid forest maps on the 4 inch to 1 mile scale made by the Forest Survey can be got from the Map Office, Dehra Dun. These show 25 feet contours, and, if desired, maps showing grasslands, sal forest and mixed forests (Stock Maps) can be purchased. Area—From memory the area is about 40,000 acres, but for the purpose of a National Sanctuary some 30,000 additional and adjoining acres should be included. The Banjar Valley is merely a name given to a forest unit. General Description—Broadly speaking the area is a huge amphitheatre surrounded in a circular manner by a range of hills about 3,000 feet high. The bulk of the area is within these hills, but the forest extends down the outward slopes of the hills until the cultivated plains are reached. It is well watered throughout, but this of course could be improved, especially on the hilltops. The low-lying portions consist of grass maidans or open plains, young trees being cut back annually by frost. As soon as the contour above the frost level is reached pure Sal (Shorca robusta) forest is found. This, however, only extends a short way up the hillsides, where it gives place to the usual mixed forest of 200 or 300 species and bamboos. The rock and soil are metamorphic sand with occasional pockets of black cotton soil. The Game—In 1900 this tract contained as much game as any tract I ever saw in the best parts of Africa in 1908. I have seen 1,500 head consisting of 11 species in an evenings stroll. It is nothing like that now, but it is still probably true to say that it contains more numbers and more species than any other tract of its size in the whole Asia. Legal Position This area is one of the oldest State reserves and belongs to Government. It contains valuable timber and is policed and administered by the Forest Department. Government would not care to give up working the valuable timber in the area, but this need not interfere with Sanctuary.

88

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

It is essential that the area remain State Forest, otherwise the Forest Act would not apply. Also it is absolutely essential for our purposes that the Act should continue to apply. Some form of 'dedication' could no doubt adjust this as there is no incompatibility. If the Act applies, as it must, and if the Forest Department continues to manage the Forest (timber), as it will, it is clear that our staff must be also the Forest Staff. Otherwise there will be two staffs in the same area, and one will be in opposition to the other. Moreover, the Forest Department has managed the game in India, against great difficulty, with signal success in most cases, and to deprive them of these functions would create resentment, especially, unless it could be shown to be reasonable and necessary. Banjar Valley The shooting of game is strictly regulated, but a tremendous lot of poaching takes place. Part of it is always sanctuary, but these sanctuaries which are found in numbers in all districts are merely administrative shooting sanctuaries, resting blocks, pending opening to shooting again. They have nothing like the status of a National Sanctuary. Some Suggestions The local Government might agree to the area being declared a National Sanctuary but would, I consider, be more inclined to give the proposal favourable consideration if it was initiated by Indian gendemen. It might, therefore, be the best course to first obtain the support of the non-official members of the Legislative Council and it is believed that the conservation of Indian wildlife for the benefit of the Indian People is a plea which no party can lightly thrust aside. Conclusion I consider that action in India is urgently required, perhaps more so than in Africa. There are I know questions of detail which apply to

A CRITICAL PERIOD

89

particular areas and particular species which I have not touched upon but in the above I have attempted to tell you something about India as a whole, and in particular what definite action that might be taken in the Central Provinces.' Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 36 (1933), pp. 40-5.

What Dunbar Brander was describing must be the area in and around the Kanha National Park in Madhya Pradesh. He considers this region better than the wilderness of Africa. It must have been magical. He would have loved to have known that this area is one of India's finest national parks today. In a way his dream came true. His proposal for the earmarking this area as a sanctuary is exceptional because of the detail that he went into. Again, it was such men and their work that made a critical difference to the future of Indian wildlife. It was 1933 and Salim Ali's first treatise on the protection of birds in India had just been published. His knowledge was amazing. Prater was another such scholar, an encyclopaedia of knowledge. He was curator of the BNHS in 1933 and his book on Indian animals is still as relevant today as it was then. He also wrote on the preservation of wildlife and the remedies necessary to resolve some of the problems. Here are some extracts from a speech he made in 1933 on the occasion of the golden jubilee of the BNHS. The Wild Animals of the Indian Empire Part 1 Introduction [Extracts of an address given by Mr. S.H. Prater, M.L.C., C.M.Z.S., the Society's Curator, at the Jubilee Meeting of the Society held in Bombay on the 10th of August, 1933] The Need for a Special Organization to Protect Wildlife Whether our reserve forests remain the principal sanctuaries for wildlife in this country or whether in some of the Provinces the purpose is affected by establishing national parks, there is need for a real organization whose

90

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

sole concern will be the protection of wild animals in these preserves. Our effort to protect wildlife have failed mainly because of the haphazard methods we employ, the lack of any coordinate policy and the lack of any real protective agency to carry that policy into effect. The Forest Department which ordinarily administers the Forest laws has multifarious duties to perform and, while the Forest Officer has discharged this trust to the best of his ability, he cannot give the question his personal attention, nor can he find time, except in a general way, to control the protection of wildlife in our forests. Experience of other countries has shown the need of a separate and distinct organization whose sole concern is the protection of wildlife in the areas in which it operates. Further, the existing laws, as now applicable in many of our Provinces, are obsolete. Naturally, their primary purpose is the protection of the forest rather than its wildlife. These laws require consolidation and bringing up to modern standards of conservation. No better guide to our Provincial Governments seeking to amend their game laws exists than the recently issued report of the Wildlife Commission in Malaya. Volume II of this Report gives the general principles of conservation. It shows how these principles may be embodied in an Act and indicates new administrative methods, based on actual experience and on the laws of other countries. With modifications, where necessary, it will serve as a model for Protective Legislation in India. Lastly there is the all-important question of making adequate financial provision for carrying out the work of conservation. In these days of depression, when most Governments are faced with deficit budgets, the apportioning of money for this purpose must be a matter of difficulty but, unless and until suitable financial provision is made by the State for the conservation of wildlife within its borders, the effort cannot succeed. This much is clear. Our present haphazard methods have failed. The experience of other countries indicates the system that should replace them. The effective introduction of this system depends upon money being provided to work it. In the United States and in other countries the problem of financing the work of conservation has been helped by the creation of special funds. The recent Wildlife Commission of Malaya, which made a careful study of this aspect of the problem, strongly urges the creation of such a

A CRITICAL PERIOD

91

fund to be termed the Wildlife Fund to be used solely for the purpose of conservation. The idea is that all fees which could be collected under Wildlife Enactments, including any licence or fees for riverine fishing, as well as revenues from all sporting arms licences, permits, duties on arms (sporting) and ammunition (sporting) should be credited to the Wildlife Fund. If any of these fees are collected by another department, then the cost of collection should be borne by the Wildlife Fund. It is the only means by which financial provision can be made expressly for the purpose of conservation. It is the only means by which the money devoted to this purpose will have a definite relation to the revenue derived by the State from wildlife sources and which, therefore, can be expended with every justification upon the conservation of these sources. It is the only way to ensure an equitable system of conservation; the only way in which a properly organized department can be stabilized. It is the solution advocated in other countries and one which is equally applicable to any country which undertakes conservation of wildlife on sound lines. If the idea of creating a Wildlife Fund is not acceptable and, if we are yet serious in our intention to do what is possible for the conservation of wildlife in India, then we must replace the Wildlife Fund by an alternative policy, which will ensure the allocation of sufficient money to meet the requirements of adequate conservation. It is so easy to refuse a constructive policy and then put nothing in its place. The necessity for conservation being clear, the importance of an adequate financial policy to support it cannot be ignored. We have indicated what other countries are doing for the protection of wildlife but it must be apparent that the measures which they have taken, whether initiated by acts of Government or by private enterprise must owe their success to the support of public opinion. There is need for the creation of sane public opinion on the subject of wildlife protection in India. At present, such opinion hardly exists and even if it does, in some quarters it may be antagonistic. This is mainly because people do not know, nor has any attempt been made to teach them something of the beauty, the interest and the value of the magnificent fauna of this country.' Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 36 (1933), pp. 1-11.

92

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

This was the early 1930s in India. Prater looked globally at the issues involved and then zeroed down on to what India really needed. His appeal for a special organization to defend wildlife is something we fight for unsuccessfully even today. We desperately need a centralized organization whose sole job will be to protect the protected areas. We fail because there is no consensus and there are too many vested interests. The Indian Forest Service does not want an Indian Wildlife Service. We have not even got an independent federal structure in place to govern both forests and wildlife. Will it ever happen? Prater believed it was essential way back in the 1930s. We are now in the twentyfirst century, but our political leaders are still deaf to reason. They want to keep the doors to nature's treasure-house open so that it can be looted and plundered. Is it not amazing how good common sense can be ignored over generations and for nearly seventy years. Assam in the early 1930s must have been like a Noah's ark. Rich dense grasslands and the endless plains of the Brahmaputra river must have created some of the finest habitat and one of the highest densities of both predator and prey. It must have been a remarkable time. A.J.W. Milroy who served as a forest officer in Assam describes the 1930s in a land where hundreds of rhinos, t h o u s a n d s of e l e p h a n t s , a n d wild b u f f a l o w e r e f o u n d everywhere—a land of gaints: The Preservation of Wildlife in India No. 3.—Assam by A.J.W. Milroy (Conservator of Forests, Assam) Types of Game Country Enormous areas of grass and reeds used to extend from the banks of the Brahmaputra towards the hills which enclose the valley on both sides, and it was here that most game used always to be found—rhinoceros, and swamp deer in the low-lying places, elephants, bison and other deer nearer the hills—but these are precisely the very localities that attract

A CRITICAL PERIOD

93

the buffalo-herdsmen and the settlers, so that a great deal of this type of jungle has now disappeared for ever and it is only a matter of time before most of the balance goes too. In these circumstances the policy adopted a few years ago of issuing gun licences almost indiscriminately has only accelerated what was bound eventually to take place, and what has already occurred in all countries suffering from or blessed (as the less far-sighted hold) with, an increasing human population. Most of the former great shooting grounds are thus being occupied exclusively by Man and nothing can be done in them for wild animals. There remain for consideration the Reserve Forests, which have been taken up mostly for timber, but which include as Game Sanctuaries two important grassy areas. Dense, evergreen forests contain comparatively little fodder suitable for game animals, which prefer the most open and the deciduous tree forests, but everywhere in Reserves reasonable game preservation should be looked for, seeing that the sale of shooting permits is a possible source of revenue, that rules exist for the benefit of the various species of animals, and that a Forest Staff is provided by Government to uphold these and other Forest Laws. It must be confessed, however, that in Assam just as in Burma, judging from some recent Annual Forest Administration Reports from that Province, game preservation is largely a matter of individual whim, and that encouraging results obtained by one Divisional Forest Officer are only too often dissipated during the regime of a successor, who is indifferent to this side of his multifarious duties. The present Government cannot be accused of lack of keenness. Three years ago, a British Officer and a Company of Assam Riffles were detailed to spend six weeks touring a district where the inhabitants had got out of hand and were poaching in the Manas Game Sanctuary on a commercial scale, while at the present moment an energetic Assistant Conservator is on special duty at the head of an anti-poaching campaign that is doing some very good work indeed. The Assam Legislative Council have recently declared Rhinoceros horns to be forest produce wherever found; it has become much easier to deal into the trade in these, as horns are now liable to seizure unless their possession can be satisfactorily accounted for. No help from the Centre, however, can make up for lack of interest on the part of the officers on the spot, though an enthusiastic

94

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Conservator can do much to overcome apathy, thanks to the tradition of loyalty in the Forest Service, but to be really effective he must possess both the time and the inclination to tour 'off the map' and away from the usual comfortable, stereotyped marching routes. At the worst a certain amount of game of most sorts will linger on in the larger Reserves for some time yet, but not in the smaller ones which can be easily raided, and from which animals are always straying into settled lands bristling with guns: at the best, if the Forest Department does not depart from the policy of recent years as regards Forest Villages and as regards demanding the cooperation in these matters of its subordinates, quite a fair number (in some places sufficient to allow of restricted shikar) of the more interesting species will survive in suitable localities within the forest boundaries. Increased pressure on the outside land being likely to lead to a demand for catastrophic deforestation of cultivable areas inside the Reserves. It had been intended, in order to obtain complete control, to acquire on behalf of Government all the guns owned by forest villager for temporary issue at the right time, together with any others that might be necessary, but this measure has had to be postponed until funds become available again. Game Sanctuaries The two Game Sanctuaries of which mention has been made are situated, the Manas towards the north-west on the Bhutan frontier and the Kaziranga in the centre of the valley on the south bank of Brahmaputra. Both areas were originally selected for the Great One-horned Rhinoceros (R.unicornis) they contained, and a very fine stock of these animals was raised as the result of the protection afforded. Kaziranga, the more lowlying, is particularly suited for buffalo too, the Manas for bison along the Bhutan boundary. The rhinoceros, our most important animal from the natural history point of view, is a difficult species to preserve even though its destruction is forbidden by law, because all parts of its body may be eaten even by Brahmins and because its horn is reputed throughout the East to possess aphrodisiac properties, while it lays itself open to easy slaughter by its habit of depositing dung on the same heap day after day. The demand

A CRITICAL PERIOD

95

for rhinoceros' horns has always been considerable in India, but of recent years China has also been in the market, consequent on the practical extermination of R. sondaicus in Lower Burma, Tenasserim, etc., with the result that a horn is now worth just about half its weight in gold. The prospect of a lucrative business led to an organization being formed for passing on rhinoceros' horns and elephant tusks to Calcutta, and the disturbed political conditions provided the virile Boro tribes (Meches and Kacharies) living near the Manas with the opportunity to take up poaching on a large scale. The operations of the financiers in the background were checked for the time being; the advent of the Assam Rifles restored order; additional game-watchers were engaged, and an Assistant Conservator was placed in charge of the Sanctuary to carry on the good work, but in view of what has happened in Burma, despite the best efforts of the authorities there, one cannot be confident that the fight we are putting up will not prove in the end to be a losing one if we merely continue on present lines. A fundamental obstacle to success lies in the difficulty of identifying poachers unless these are actually caught in flagrante delicto, and this must always be a rare occurrence when members of a gang have only to separate and run a few yards into the high grass to evade capture. Both Sanctuaries are at present inaccessible for want of roads and camping huts except to those who can travel light, such as poachers and game-watchers, and to those who can command the use of elephants, such as Forest Officers and a few planters. It was pointed out some years ago that this being so it would be quite possible, without the outside world being any the wiser at the time, for a dishonest subordinate in immediate charge of a Sanctuary to sell all the game while his forest officer, absorbed in other duties, was earning credit for the good work he might be doing elsewhere in the division. The loss would obviously be irreparable, and it was suggested that in these circumstances the western and eastern portions of the Manas Sanctuary, which with adjacent Reserves contains an effective area of about 150 sq. miles, should be opened to shooting under very strict supervision, the bag being limited (wounded to count as killed) and very high fees being charged, while the

96

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

central part was preserved inviolate for the benefit of those interested in studying or photographing wild animals. It is permissible to believe that the Sanctuaries might have some chance of survival if they could be made more or less self-supporting, but precious little otherwise, and the question is one on which, we may feel sure, advice from the Society from the depths of its experience would not be resented. The Assam of the future may very well be proud to think it is taking its stand by the side of other civilized countries in saving its fauna from extinction, but it is going to be a poor Province, at any rate to start with, and if only some revenue could be expected from shooting permits and from the sale of captured specimens to Zoological Gardens, there would clearly be less initial hostility for the good cause to face. Anything in the nature of a Public Park on the lines of the Kruger National Park would be out of the question unless it was under Imperial control because if the Assamese tax payer ever wants anything of this sort, he will certainly demand that all predatory and dangerous animals be removed before he disports himself in it. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 37 (1934), pp. 97-101.

Milroy realized the uniqueness of Manas and advocated in the early 1930s that it be inviolate. Today it is one of the most troubled UNESCO world heritage sites. Forest officers like Milroy and Champion at different ends of India were unique in their quest for protection. Here is what F.W. Champion wrote about wildlife in the United Provinces in 1934: Preserving Wildlife in the United Provinces F. W. Champion One among the numerous striking results of the Great War has been an awakening all over the world to the fact that wild animals are tending to become less and less in numbers in many countries, and often species that were common a few decades ago are being, or actually have been, entirely exterminated. Most of us who went through the War saw far too much of killing ever to want to see any more; and the natural reaction has been that a new spirit of sympathy with wild creatures has become

A CRITICAL PERIOD

97

firmly established in many countries. Wildlife protection societies are springing up here and there, particularly in America and England, and the Society for the Protection of the Fauna of the Empire is doing great work in trying to preserve the wonderful fauna of the British empire from further wanton destruction. An enthusiastic branch of this society has been started in India and a very good work is being done, but unfortunately it is not receiving so much support from Indians as could be desired. Indians, many of whom are prohibited by their religion from taking life, should be the very first to support such a society and a number are already whole heartedly doing so, but real mass support has yet to be received. This I believe to be very largely due to lack of knowledge of the aims and objects of such a society, and insufficient propaganda, and I am confident that much greater support will be received in future as a result of the great efforts now being made by the Bombay Natural History Society and the various local branches of the Society for the Preservation of the Fauna of the Empire, which all who have the slightest interest in wild animals should join without a day's further delay. After all, once a species of wild animal has been exterminated, no money, no society, no human agency can bring that species back to the world, and delay in helping those who are doing their best to save species already threatened with extermination may mean that help, tardily given, is given too late. Position of Wildlife The present position in the United Provinces is perhaps not quite so bad as in some other parts of India, owing to the presence of a very sympathetic government, an influential forest department, and great land holders, all of whom have always remembered that within limits, wild creatures have just as much right to exist as human race. The position inside reserved forests and in certain large estates, which is fairly satisfactory, will be discussed later in this article, but first the present state of affairs in the ordinary districts composing 80 per cent or more of the whole Province, which are causing so much worry to those who are interested in wildlife. Frankly the position is appalling. The vast increase in gun licences which has taken place within recent years, combined with the greatly improved means of transport, has caused a drain on the wildlife of the districts such as can end only in the almost complete destruction

98

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

of any kind of wild creature considered to be worth powder and shot. Laws do exist imposing close seasons, but these laws often are not, and cannot be, observed in present-day conditions. Deputy Commissioners and Superintendents of Police in some cases do their utmost, but they are so over-worked nowadays with political and economical troubles that, however keen they may be, they literally have neither the time nor the energy to try to enforce unpopular laws, which, by comparison with present-day troubles, possibly do not seem very important. Further the responsible officers in a district are very few in number and it is quite impossible for them to stop bribery among their often low-paid subordinates. A rupee or two or a piece of meat is quite sufficient temptation to an underpaid chowkidar not to report an offence under a Wild Animals Protection Act, particularly as it is often extremely difficult to prove such offence, and, even if proved, a subordinate magistrate will generally let off the offender with a purely nominal fine. It therefore seems that, in the present state of the country, any Act enforcing close seasons outside Reserved Forests, however well it may be conceived, is worth little more than the paper on which it is written. In actual fact special efforts are now being made in Hamirpur and Meerut districts to protect sambar and chital; but it is not known to the writer how far such efforts are proving successful. Animals like blackbuck and chital and game-birds, both in the plains and particularly the hills, are literally being wiped out at an increasingly rapid rate and one wonders if there will be anything left except monkeys and jackals after another two or three decades. There is one bright spot, however, and that is that nongame birds at least are not harried to the same extent as in England because the egg-collector is scarce, and the average Indian boy, unlike his British confrere, does not amuse himself by collecting vast numbers of birds' eggs, only to throw them away in most cases as soon as the boy begins to grow up. Taken as a whole there is no doubt whatever but that the position in these plains districts of the United Provinces is just about as bad as it could be, but one must always remember that these areas are very densely populated and that really there is not very much room for any considerable numbers of the larger game animals, which must tend to interfere with the cultivator and his crops. In any case leopards are found in many places, since they are prolific breeders and very difficult

A CRITICAL PERIOD

99

to keep in check, and even if more adequate protection were given to the game animals in cultivated districts, it is probable that their numbers would still be kept down by a corresponding increase in the numbers of leopards. Sufficient has now been written to show that the position in the cultivated districts is very unsatisfactory, but that increasing population in already heavily populated areas, combined with the present political and economic distress, makes it very difficult to make practical suggestions for improving matters. What can be done is for large landholders in sparsely populated districts to preserve restricted areas really efficiently and noble examples of what a great help to the wildlife of a country such measures can prove to be is to be found in the great swampdeer preserves of Oudh, notably those of the Maharani Saheba of Singahi and of Captain Lionel Hearsey. The former of these has been under careful protection for many years and an area of perhaps 20 square miles now contains several thousand heads of these magnificent deer. A few are shot annually, but the number destroyed is almost certainly less than the natural increase and these public-spirited benefactors can justifiably feel that, so long as they maintain their present standard of efficient preservation, there is no fear of the swamp-deer following the already long list of fine animals which have been exterminated from the United Provinces. Reserved Forests Now the position of wild animals in the Reserved Forest, of which the writer, being a Forest Officer, has perhaps a specialised knowledge, will be considered. Firstly the writer would state most emphatically that United Provinces forest officers as a class are, and always have been, extremely sympathetic towards wild animals. Few are really heavy killers and quite a number do not shoot animals at all, beyond their requirements for food for themselves or their camp followers. An odd individual here and there both in the present day and in the past, has possibly let his sporting instincts drive him into becoming a really heavy killer, but the amount of slaughter done by the average forest officer in these Provinces is conspicuously small. It sometimes happens that disgruntled sportsmen state that forest officers are selfish or destroy more animals than all other

100

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

classes put together; but these statements are most emphatically untrue and generally have an inner history, which reveals the accuser as having some personal grudge against an individual forest officer, which leads him to make general insinuations which are totally unfounded. None could be keener on the preservation of wildlife than the present writer, and, if he thought that his brother officers were indifferent to the preservation of wild animals, he would not hesitate to say so. The writer believes that it would be a great mistake to remove the wild animals inside Reserved Forests from the protection of the forest department and place them in charge of a separate Game Department. The present system is working very well and such action would be regarded as a slur on forest officers and would alienate the all-important sympathy of the powerful forest department. The United Provinces reserved forests are not very extensive and they are all under the personal supervision of divisional forest officers. Poaching does occur to a limited extent, particularly during the monsoon when the forests have to be deserted owing to their unhealthiness, and from motor cars, but such poaching is not very extensive and every effort is made to keep it in check. Elaborate rules, which are constantly being amended, do exist for the issue for shooting licences, for the enforcement of close seasons, and for helping any species which is tending to become scarce. These rules may not be perfect—no rules ever are—but at least their object is to provide shooting for all who apply in the right way, and at the same time to preserve the wild animals in perpetuity without letting them increase to such an extent as to become a nuisance to forest management or to surrounding villages. Species that, for any particular reason, need help are entirely protected, examples being wild elephants for many years and sambar in Lansdowne division since an attack of rinderpest in 1927; and senior forest officers are always ready to listen sympathetically to applications for protecting particular animals in particular tracts. Even tigers now have a close season and are not allowed to be shot by artificial light. Some may argue that it is a wrong policy to protect tigers, but at least such protection shows that forest officers consider that even tigers have the right to live in their jungles. It is sometimes stated that, even in the reserved forests, wild animals are much scarcer than they used to be. The writer cannot speak for thirty

A CRITICAL PERIOD

101

or forty years ago since the old records are not clear and he was not in India at that time; but, even if the head of game had diminished, it is possible that the numbers were excessive in the past or that the memories of those who claim that animals are disappearing are a little at fault. After all, most of us tend to think of the 'good old times', although it is possible that those times were not quite so good as they now appear in perspective. An effort has been made to collect figures of animals shot in the past with those shot nowadays for comparison, but records of thirty or forty years ago do not give the information required. The following are the conclusions that the writer draws from the figures that are available: (a) Taken as a whole the head of game shot recently has generally not shown any marked decrease, except in the mountain reserved forests, where control is not so easy. (b) Tigers appear to have increased and marked decreases seem to have taken place in the numbers of nilgai, kakar, wild dog and blackbuck. The decreases are partly due to serious floods and rinderpest epidemics, and are probably natural fluctuations which will right themselves in time. Wild dogs have decreased owing to the large reward paid for their destruction. (c) The decreases in the number of some animals shot recently are due to the removal of rewards as a measure of economy. (d) It may always be remembered, however, that the number of animals inside Reserved Forests is probably being artificially swelled by the influx of refugees from the appalling conditions at present prevailing outside. This influx will decrease as animals outside become exterminated. Also modern rifles are so good and shooting with the help of a motor car is so easy, that probably a greater proportion of the existing animal population is shot annually nowadays than was the case in the past. (e) The forest department watches these lists carefully and takes action whenever such action appeared to be required. (f) The general impression of senior forest officers is that, although there have been considerable fluctuations in particular areas, the game in the United Provincial Reserved Forests as a whole

102

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

has not markedly decreased during the last 25 years, except in the high hill forests. To summarise, the present position of wild animals inside the Reserved Forests of the plains and foot hills of the United Provinces does not give cause for serious anxiety, except for the ever-increasing use of that arch enemy of the wild animals—the motor car. The numbers of the wild animals in the mountain reserved forests appear definitely to be decreasing. The position in some zemindari estates is good and in others poorer; and the position in the ordinary districts is almost hopeless. Some Suggestions The writer would make the following suggestions to help the present state of affairs: (a) Public opinion—This is by far the most important of all methods of wildlife conservation and without it, ail efforts to preserve wild creatures will prove abortive. Good work is already being done by propaganda and by lectures but much more remains to be done. Good illustrated books help greatly and the formation of sanctuaries and national parks, where the general public can see wild animals in their natural state, would all help. Major Corbett as local Secretary of the United Provinces branch of the Preservation of the Fauna of the Empire Society is doing a lot to assist in this work. (b) Laws—It is much easier in the present state of India to pass a law than to see it enforced, but the writer would greatly like to see laws passed on the following points: 1. Sale of shikar meat, trophies, etc.—It is of vital importance that a law be passed at an early date totally forbidding the sale of any portion of a wild animal, with certain definite exceptions. Such exceptions would be the dropped horns of deer, and the hides of deer where numbers have to be reduced. Special licences should be issued in such cases and such licences, liable to cancellation at any moment, should be under the personal control of the Divisional forests officers, where reserved forests are anywhere near, or under Deputy commissioners where there are no forest officers.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

103

The sale of any shikar trophy should be entirely and absolutely prohibited. Such a law, properly enforced, would finish the professional poacher, and would end the nefarious dealings of certain taxidermists who sell shikar trophies to those 'sportsmen' who are incapable of bagging anything themselves. 2. Limitation of gun licences—This is very difficult in the present political state of the country, but at least greater efforts could be made to differentiate between game licences and licences for the protection of the crops, person, property or display. Gun licences for the protection of crops should insist that barrels should be sawn-off short, as such licences are very largely applied for when the real object is poaching. 3. Motor cars (and also carts and tongas)—The shooting of any wild animal from, or within, say, 400 yards of a motorcar, cart or tonga, either by day or by night, should be made an offence liable to prosecution. The writer personally would like to stop motor cars altogether from entering Reserved Forests, or, where this cannot be done, he would like to place check-chowkies at the entrances and exits of such roads, the cost to be covered by a small wheel-tax. Firearms would either have to be deposited at such chowkies or would be scaled, so that they could not be used while inside the forests. The excuse of requiring fire arms for protection en route should not be accepted, as passengers in motorcars very rarely need protection from wild animals except possibly from occasional rogue elephants or man-eaters. Luckily recent economies have resulted in the abandoning of some of the motor-roads in the reserved forests of the United Provinces. The writer would like to see them all abandoned! The old-time shikari or forest officer managed perfectly well without them, and they tend only too often to make his modern successor slap-dash and lazy. 4. Protection of rare stragglers—It occasionally happens that a rare animal, such as a rhinoceros, strays into reserved forests from Nepal or elsewhere. Such animals should be rigidly

104

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

protected with a fine of, say, Rs 2,000, or imprisonment, for their destruction. The excuse that 'If I don't shoot it, someone else will' should never be accepted in such cases. The recent law passed in Bengal for the protection of the rhinoceros, should be extended to the whole of India. 5. Rewards—The writer considers that Government rewards for destroying wild animals should be given far more sparingly than in the past. Luckily, recent economies have resulted in a great reduction in the rewards offered, and it is sincerely to be hoped that such reduction will be permanent. Rewards in the past have encouraged poachers and have sometimes caused as upset in the balance of nature where they were misapplied. They are really quite unnecessary except for man-eaters and notoriously destructive creatures such as porcupines. Since writing the above I have been reconsidering the question and have read up a certain amount of literature on the subject. On the whole I have little to add to what I wrote before except that I am not so certain as I was that the head of game inside the United Provinces' reserved forests is not decreasing. I was posted to N. Kheri Division in 1921 and I returned there again in 1931. Although still a good place for animals in 1931, I would estimate that there had been at least a 25 per cent decrease in nearly all species during that decade. The reasons for this reduction I would put down to (a) Motor cars making shooting far easier than it used to be, (b) the destruction of game in the adjoining areas outside the forests resulting in a smaller influx and greater damage to animals straying outside. I am now in Bahraich division in Oudh which has a reputation of being a good game division. I have now been here for 5 months and so far I have found game of all kinds to be rather scarce although I hear that more animals come in from Nepal in the hot weather. The reasons for this apparent decrease are the same as in Kheri, i.e., motor cars and destruction of animals outside the forests, combined with increased poaching along and near the Nepal border. Journal ofBombay Natural History Society, Vol. 37 (1934).

A CRITICAL PERIOD

105

Champion was a real character of the forest service. One of the few who gave up the gun totally and only photographed wild animals. His books are remarkable. His pictures even better. He hated the invention of the motor car and its impact on the hunters who used it to hunt, even more. He loved the forests of the United Provinces. He was one of the greatest fighters of those times for wildlife, and was endlessly suggesting steps to protect the rich wilderness of those times. In a way, we are journeying with a wild bunch of people from one corner of India to another be it Assam or UP or the Saurashtra coast. The 1920s had triggered so much debate that the 1930s were full of detailed analysis of those times and the suggested means of solving some of the problems. The 1930s was a decade where the maximum amount of writing on wildlife took place as compared to any period before that. People were really worried about the future. The BNHS played a vital role in the expression of comment and opinion in its journal. Examples follow: The Preservation of Wildlife in India No. 5—The Indian Lion By Sir Patrick Cadell, KT., C.S.I., C.I,E. I have been asked by the Honorary Secretary of Bombay Natural History Society to write a note upon the Indian Lion, and the measures needed for his preservation. I gladly do so because I believe that there is no other wild animal in India which could so easily become totally extinct. It is now preserved solely by the efforts of one State. Should that State for any reason become weary of well doing, the lion would disappear from India in two or three years. I am often asked how many lions still remain in the Gir. As I have said above, there were supposed to be less than a dozen in 1880, and about the same at the beginning of the century when Lord Curzon's visit was cancelled. As a result of the strict preservation during the Administration the number was believed to have increased to fifty, though even in those days poaching was not unknown. It has since been stated in the London Times, and the statement is quoted in General Burton's

106

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

book, that there are now two hundred lions. I believe this number to be greatly exaggerated. The fact that lions move in troops, and that they cover long distances leads to over estimation. If a man sees a troop of six or seven animals, and hears of a similar number some miles away within a few days, he naturallyfixestoo high a number for the whole forest. My own opinion though it is only a guess is that there are not much more than 75 to 80. It is obvious that this number cannot stand a drain of ten or twelve being shot yearly, especially if the animals so killed outside Junagadh limits are all of young breeding stock. It may be observed that there is no real excuse for shooting a lioness in mistake for a lion. Even if the shooting of female tigers and panthers were regarded as being unsportsmanlike and reprehensible, the sportsman might well plead that he had not sufficient time, or sufficient knowledge, to distinguish. But he could not truthfully say so in the case of the lioness. A lion which is hot easily distinguishable as being such, must be very young and worthless as a trophy to a self-respecting sportsman. What then is the remedy to be adopted against unfair or unwise shooting? It has been recently proposed in a high official quarter that all the jurisdictions concerned, that is all those which possess or border upon any portion of the Gir forest, should agree to refrain from shooting within a mile from the boundary of another jurisdiction, and from shooting any but full-grown males. This would lead to some improvement though in two recent cases the condition that the animal shot should be a full-grown male has been, I am afraid, somewhat liberally interpreted. But it may be doubted whether this is enough, and I venture to think that it would be better to come to an agreement that the total number of lions to be shot in one year should not exceed some such figure asfiveor six. The pressure on Junagadh of suggestions for invitations to shoot lions is, it may be observed, increasing year by year, and the Junagadh Darbar would gladly welcome some such limitation. Unless an agreement is reached, and is faithfully observed, the danger of the disappearance of the lion from the fauna of India and consequently from its last home in Asia, is obvious. R.W. Burton, 'The Preservation of Wildlife in India, Journal of Bombay Natural History Society.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

107

The ruler of Junagadh had, in the nick of time, protected the lion. He was an exception to the rule. That is why the Asiatic lion survives in Gir today. It was in 1900 that the nawabs controlled hunting by carefully limiting the shoots. Strict quotas helped in the recovery of the lion. As Mahesh Rangarajan puts it: 'Its rarity and value as a trophy made the Lion a valuable political pawn to have at hand—paradoxically its value in the hunt became vital to its continued existence.' The British supported the Nawab at critical points and there was never any indiscriminate killing of Lions—there were no bounties either. The lions ended up with large amounts of protection. Let us not forget that the hunting records of another ruler from the then state of Bikaner, in the 1930s, was very different. Sadul Singh of Bikaner shot 50000 heads of animal including 46000 game birds! And in the bag was also one Asiatic lion. Wild Animals of the Indian Empire and the Problem of their Protection (Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the BNHS—38(1):1935) An interesting development of the whole question of Preservation of Wildlife in India was the recent Inter-Provincial Conference convened by the Government of India at Delhi in January 1935 at which the Society was represented by the Curator, Mr. S.H. Prater. The Conference was instrumental in making a number of detailed recommendations for the better protection of wild animals both inside and outside forest areas. If these recommendations are accepted and put into force by the various provincial governments, much will have been accomplished to improve the deplorable conditions, which exist in many parts of the country. But while the Conference made numerous recommendations of detail—the broad issues underlying the whole problem remain unsettled. Among these is the need of fully exploring the possibility of creating permanent sanctuaries wherever necessary for giving permanent shelter to wildlife. Equally important is administering the laws related to the protection of wild animals. To fix the responsibility on an already overworked and under-staffed department without

108

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

providing it with adequate means to enforce these laws will not improve the position. The same holds good regarding the protection of animal life outside forest areas, where their destruction is now greatest. Mere legislation without the means to enforce it, must remain, as at present, quite useless in preventing the destruction of wildlife outside forest areas both in and out of season. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 38(1) (1935), p. 223.

I think that this 1935 conference was the first ever to look at the problems of wildlife all across India. To this national conference went many of the people whose writings I have extracted. The 'wild bunch' must have fought its battles at this conference and I am certain that many of their recommendations must have been accepted for action. The conference signified the seriousness of the problem that forests and wildlife faced. It must have activated many into action. Let us travel to southern India and see what it was like then: v l h r i sM' ;ti aioq n ^ a g f t f i S I ri?9fu»ivi <m *» . . cVnwfiq issbiloq o'.Hf.ub.v s n o i l arfi •-»bf.fu •• [ The Preservation of Wildlife in India \jj >ui j .j. n w n * M inyf?;/^ D9fjni.lnO No.7: Madras Presidency (The wild animals of the Indian Empire and the problem of their preservation) By R.D. Richmond, I.ES. (Retd.) The Status of Wildlife In the Godavari, where the gaur is probably on the increase, chital and sambar are not as numerous as they were; much of the damage, strangely enough, being done with the bow and arrow. For very many years there has been little game in the Ganjam district, so little in fact that the balance of nature is upset and the district is principally notorious for man-eating tigers. The populated north of the vast tract ofVizagapatnam and Jeypore, which is a native state, has little game left in it, but the sparsely populated south is well off for all kinds and is the only place in the Madras Presidency where the buffalo is found. Very little of these areas are reserved forests. The Eastern Ghats are of little interest, except bsiu;J'.)b !c t ^ m i a line I

••< >••

j u q boB

>'

w : ••

:

'

..

A CRITICAL PERIOD

109

for chinkara at the foothills and some antelope on the plains. The 2,000 sq. miles of the Nallamalai hills contain plenty of game of all kinds and it is strange that the gaur does not occur. What are known as the Ceded Districts contain very little at the present day. Once the haunt of the elephant, forest destruction preceding cultivation, and accelerated by the goat, has had the inevitable result of driving the game away as well as of reducing parts of the country almost to the condition of desert. There are however, still antelope and chinkara, while sambur are to be found on the hills of Cuddapah and Chittoor; in fact there are still plenty of game in the latter district, even if the glory of Chamla Valley has departed—due to fewer Europeans visiting it. The Javadi and Salem hills contain gaur which are closely protected and which do some damage to forest works, but the rest of the game animals are poorly represented. The Palni hills of Madura provide representative animals on the slopes, the Nilgiri goat (Hemitragus hylocrius) on the edges of the plateau (7,000 ft.), while the gaur occasionally visits the plateau. But protection is none too good in spite of a constituted game association. Tinnevelly is moderately well off and here too the Nilgiri goat is to be found, though the numbers have decreased considerably. The forest area of South Coimbatore is famous for the 'Grassy Hills', on the borders of the Cochin State, at an elevation of6,000—8,000 ft.; the Nilgiri goat being common, while elephant and gaur are to be found on the open grass. This forest division contains, in one particular part, the white bison which appears to be developing into a distinct variety. The North Coimbatore and Kollegal divisions have perhaps suffered more than most, including, as they do, so many villages, from the increase of poaching; but other and perhaps temporary factors are at work, if anything is to be inferred from the varying incidence of the number of game animals in a certain locality. Reported in 1893 as denuded of game, once very common, the old state of affairs was restored from 1901 onwards while there is now again complaint of scarcity. Elephants have increased to an inconvenient extent in numbers of recent years. The forests of Malabar, that is to say the protected areas, for there are very considerable tracts of private forest land in which there is no protection or shooting regulation, are for the most part exceedingly well stocked with game and other animals of all kinds, particularly elephant

110

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and gaur—the forest areas belonging to Government are more compact than elsewhere and there is far less population inside them and on their edges—consequently there is less poaching. To judge by the complaints of damage done by wild animals it would be supposed that South Kanara teemed with wildlife; but such is far from being the case, the complaints being in reinforcement of agitation for the abolition of the forests. But in the upper hills there are sambur and there are a few gaur—also elephants. The tiger, accused of killing great numbers of domesticated cattle (and it is a fact that the mortality of cattle from wild animals is greater here than elsewhere) is in fact rare, the delinquent being the panther, living in low rocky hills distant from the real forests, and killing cattle as there is nothing else to live on. The Nilgiris, a district at elevation from 1,000-8,000 ft., is richer in fauna of all kinds than any other. Naturally well endowed in this respect, protection in the last forty or fifty years has been good on the whole. The shooting is regulated by a Game Association, the members of which are those who take out annual shooting licences—these are mostly Europeans—and a special protective staff is entertained. Recommendations There is no need to apprehend that the fauna of Madras is decreasing to a dangerous extent at present, though it would be idle to pretend that there are not forces at work which should be guarded against. Apathy on the part of a new class of officer, who is not interested in sport or natural history, and the increased facility with which arms may be legally possessed may both be corrected. Public opinion may in course of time be developed, though this will necessarily be a slow process and it will be fatal if the impression is formed that the interests of the cultivator will not be protected. There is ample room for the wild animals in the considerable areas of forest land which is the property of the state and which need never be alienated, all that is required is the determination to make protection effective. 'Preserves', in the Presidency at all events, appear to be uncalled for—the whole of the forest area is a 'preserve'— and the regulations permit of certain parts being closed to shooting either permanently or temporarily. 'National Parks', if by these are meant areas which are specially protected and in which no shooting by the public is

A CRITICAL PERIOD

111

allowed, but which are maintained so that the public may see and study the habits of wild animals, are on a different footing. These should be of great general interest and educational value and tend to promote that public opinion which is so desirable. A difficulty in connection with these 'National Parks', however, is their location; they should be near areas of considerable population, and be served by roads; also the forest should be of a type which allows of the animals being easily seen. It is perhaps sometimes overlooked that conditions in different countries vary and that what may be suitable in Africa, for example, is inappropriate in Madras. It will not be easy to find an area which fulfils all the essentials; a considerable sum of money will ultimately be required and it cannot be expected that National Parks will be self-supporting; but the first steps are being taken and it may be h^oed that they will bear fruit. Suggestions are from time to time heard as to the desirability of establishing a separate game department under a Warden. Those who advance this view possibly have the conditions of Africa in mind; in India there is already an organization one of the duties of which is to protect the animals as in the case of the other contents of the forest—the appointment of a Warden, and some additional staff, would lead to dual control and friction: nor is there any need for it. Properly controlled and supported, with some strengthening in certain places, the ordinary staff of the forest department should be well able to do what is required. But the department requires greater support. It is essential that the authority responsible for the issue of licence under the Arms Act should consult the forest authorities on applications, in respect of residents in, or near, the forest; that guns concerned in shooting offences be confiscated, that the Magistracy should attach greater importance to offences of this class and it is extremely desirable that the sale of flesh at certain seasons should be declared illegal. Finally it is anomalous that the head of the forest department should, in theory, be unconcerned with this branch of the work of his department, at present in the hands of an authority which has no occasion to go into the forests and which is not in any way concerned with other branches of forest administration. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 38 (1935), pp. 221-4.

112

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The BNHS encouraged debate, and R.C. Morris was the first in his attack on Richmond's view of the wildlife of the Madras Presidency. The dialogue in those days could get furious but were remarkably detailed in their content, as can be seen in the following piece from Morris: Comments on Mr. Richmond's Note By R.C. Morris In the note on the 'Game Preservation in the Madras Presidency it is mentioned that there is an area of 16,000 sq. miles providing a natural Sanctuary for the fauna with the Forest Department as an organization to protect it, the protection of game being a definite duty of the forest staff. This may be said to apply to nearly every country holding forests with a forest department to control the same. Although in theory the machinery of protection exists, and shooting is regulated, in practice it has been found, and I fear always will be found, that Game Protection is relegated to the background as forest officers find that the whole of their time is taken up by other work, in other words the preservation of the fauna takes a back seat to the protection of the flora. That the forest department have failed to afford the necessary protection for the fauna cannot be gainsaid, nor can forest officers be expected to devote the required amount of time to Game Preservation, however interested they might be in the matter, and I am sorry to say that in many cases these days there is little interest. It is mentioned that areas denuded of game in 1893 were restored to the old state of affairs from 1901 onwards. I think it would be more correct to have said 'denuded of chital' instead of game. I am fairly sure that the author had before him a note written by a Collector in 1893, and if I remember rightly this only referred to chital in a particular area. I do not agree with the opinion that there is no cause for apprehension that the fauna of the Madras Presidency is decreasing to a dangerous extent. This statement covers the whole of the fauna and I consider that chital, blackbuck and chinkara have certainly decreased to a dangerous

A CRITICAL PERIOD

113

extent and will be extinct in South India in not many years hence unless steps are taken in the matter. The Nilgai in South India have already gone the same way. I entirely disagree with the opinion that the appointment of a Game Warden and special staff for the control of a National Park, Game Sanctuary for the fauna in the Ordinary Reserves is unnecessary, nor can I see how the present staff of the forest department will be in any better position to control the fauna, still less a National Park or game sanctuary, than it has been in the past. I cannot see how any friction could arise if the Chief Conservator of Forests controlled both the Forest and Game Departments, the Game Warden if required being a forest officer specially seconded for this purpose as was the case in Burma. To my mind it is quite certain that a Game Department would improve matters considerably whether a National Park was established or not, and if any doubt exists on this point a visit to Ceylon might be made to compare the condition of game in areas under the control of the Game Association or Game Department in Ceylon with that in the areas controlled only by the forest department. I do agree with the author in his opinion that the present dual control in connection with shooting licences should cease. Shooting licences should be issued by the District Forest Officers (on behalf of the Collectors). Further no arms licences should be issued by District Magistrates to people living near Reserved or Unreserved forests without the District Forest Officers being consulted in the matter: more important still Magistrates should be made to take a far more serious view of poaching offences under the Arms Act (illegal possession of guns) than they do at present. Punishments meted out to poachers are ridiculous: an inveterate poacher is not worried at all at the prospect of serving two or three months' imprisonment occasionally. The status of Wildlife in the Madras Presidency may be put shortly as follows: 1. (a) Within Government forests In one or two districts, take Ganjam of example, there is little or no game left. In other districts a few species exist thinly scattered, and in parts of the districts of Coimbatore,

134 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Malabar, Madura and South Kanara game, with the exception of chital and antelope, is still fairly plentiful. The reason is not far to seek. These districts hold areas which have been difficult of access to the poacher and here game still holds its own. Chital and antelope live in country that is easily poached and unless early measures are taken chital, blackbuck and chinkara will be exterminated in South India not very many years hence, just as the Nilgai have been. I say that certain areas 'have been' inaccessible to poachers as with modern guns and cheap electric torches the present day poacher is a far more dangerous enemy to game than he was in the past. Poachers are now penetrating into parts they have never been into before, and it is a certainty that in course of time no part of the jungle will be free from the poachers' activities. Take for example the Billigirirangans. Were it not for the presence of Planters residing on the hills to put a curb on poaching sambhur on the hills would be exterminated. At the northern end of the hills, in the Kollegal Di/ision far from these Estates, very few sambhur are left, most of them have been shot out by the Sholagas who hold guns (some time back 14 guns were seized in one day, but the Sholagas hold just as many now). In the Mysore part of the hills very few sambhur exist although the area is known as the Chamarajanagar Game Sanctuary. What applies here also applies to other districts with the exception of the Nilgiris where the Nilgiri Game Association run a fairly good show. In the more accessible tracts of the Coimbatore, Malabar, Madura and South Kanara districts the status of wildlife is not found in large populations. The new experimental measure for the compulsory inoculation of village cattle in the Kollegal and North Coimbatore Divisions should keep bison comparatively free from rinderpest, and is a measure that I should like to see carried out in other districts where bison occur, (b) Outside Government Forests Very little game exists, and the remnant is rapidly vanishing.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

115

2. (a) The species of animals for the protection of which there is a special urgency: Chital, blackbuck, chinkara, 4-horned antelope and, in some parts, sambhur. (b) Animals which do not require vigorous protection but need a modified form of protection: Bison only should be placed in this category. Legislation 3. The effectiveness of the laws at present in force in various Provinces which regulate the killing or trapping of Wildlife in Government Forests. Proposals for their improvement where necessary, particularly in regard to the use of motor cars, dazzle light, nets and pits. The present laws in force in the Madras Presidency would be very effective if properly enforced. Suggested improvements are: (1) Considerable moderation in the issue of gun licences, especially in areas adjacent to reserved or unreserved forests; (2) the necessity of Magistrates consulting District Forest Officers on all application for arms licences when the applicants reside within poachable distances of reserved or unreserved forests; (3) the necessity for far more severe and deterrent punishments on offenders convicted under the Forest Laws and the Arms Act; (4) the necessity for District Forest Officers to treat the subject of Game Preservation as one of their most important duties; (5) stricter rules in regard to the use of motor cars for shooting. It is suggested that the Governments concerned should prohibit the shooting of large or small game within 100 to 200 yards of any public road. There is already a rule against shooting any animals except the carnivores with a torchlight, and I do not think this can be improved upon if enforced properly. The stricter enforcement of the laws against netting and pitting, both of which are carried on in out-of-the-way parts (instances have been reported recently), and the prohibition of either netting or pitting in unreserved forests.

136 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

4. The control of slaughter of wildlife outside government forests: This is a more difficult matter, and I am not sure whether government have any legal right to put forward measures for the control of slaughter in private lands. This is probably a case of educating the landowners on the matter. 5. Legislation controlling sale of hides, horns, etc. In the Madras Presidency I do not think there is any legislation in force at present prohibiting the marketing of flesh, hides and horns of game animals either in close season or out and such legislation should be enacted at a very early date. A law against the export of plumage exists; and legislation prohibiting the marketing of all parts of game animals throughout the year is very necessary. Under the heading of legislation I should like to see the Indian chevrotain or Mouse Deer added to the list of animals completely protected, and the use of a shot gun (buck shot) on all deer and antelope should be prohibited. In Coimbatore a slip is now added to all shooting licences asking the licensees to look for and report to the District Forest Officer of the Division in which they are shooting all cases of poachers' machans on trees, or hides on the ground, over water and saltlicks which they may come across and this should be made one of the clauses in the Rules attached to shooting licences. If Government could be persuaded to agree to the immediate dismissal of any Forest Guard in whose beat an illicit hide or machan is found the would-be poacher would receive a tremendous knock, as no Forest Guard is going to risk losing his job to help a poacher whatever inducement the latter may offer him. Administration 6. (a) The desirability of definitely laying on the Forest Department the duty of preserving the Fauna and Flora (and not merely trees) in the areas in their charge; (b) the desirability of creating a distinct organisation within the

A CRITICAL PERIOD

117

Forest Department for the protection of wild animals within government forests. I consider it is definitely desirable to create a special department, to be controlled by the Chief Conservator of Forests, for the protection of wild animals within government reserved and unreserved forests. The control of both the forest and game departments by the Chief Conservator of the Province should remove most causes of friction that may otherwise occur between the two departments, whether the game warden is a seconded forest officer or not. However much district forest officers are encouraged to treat game preservation in the proper light this interest is bound to fade again in course of time and will only be kept alive by the existence of game departments with which the forest officers will have to cooperate in full. The existence of a game department is bound to improve matters whether National Parks or Game Sanctuaries are established or not. 7. The formation of National Parks or in the alternative of strict Nature Reserves where possible, and 8. The question of making separate financial provision or the creation of a special fund for carrying out the work of conservation. If the formation of National Park in the Madras Presidency is considered unfeasible, I do not think the necessity for a separate financial provision will arise as a Game Department would presumably be financed under an increased Forest Budget; but for the creation of a National Park or Game Sanctuaries separate financial provision would be required. Two areas do exist in the Madras Presidency which could be turned into National Parks provided communications are improved, and here the value of having the Chief Conservator of Forests as the head of both departments will be seen, as in one of the areas the improvement of communications will assist considerably in the extraction of forest produce. In this case the term

138 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

'National Park' will not be correct as forest work will be carried on in that area, and it would be a Game Sanctuary, but in either category the control of the fauna in this area should fall on the Game Department, and would have to have a special staff in permanent control, special funds for financing the work being drawn from the most obvious sources, i.e. the revenue derived from: (1) Game licences; (2) Licences and permits for sporting arms; (3) Import and export licences for the above arms; (4) Duty on sporting arms and cartridges; (5) Licences to sell or store sporting arms and cartridges; (6) Fishing licences; (7) Fines and penalties for infringement of shooting rules; (8) Fines imposed for offences connected with poaching etc.; (9) Sales of confiscated and picked up trophies and parts of game animals and birds (both game and protected). The other area is I consider eminently suitable for the formation of a National Park and should be self-supporting in course of time. General 9. The position of the cultivator in relation to wildlife and the provision which might be made for the protection of human life and property in the neighbourhood of forests from the ravages of wild beasts. The damages done by wild beasts, other than elephants, is very much exaggerated. Elephants do a lot of damage, in fact unless early measures are taken to deal with the elephant menace it will be, and has been in the last few years, an intolerable hardship on the cultivator whose lands are adjacent to or surrounded by forests in which elephants occur. It is suggested that one of the best methods to meet the elephant problem is the appointment of three or four salaried men to shoot the

A CRITICAL PERIOD

119

leading offending bulls at the time crops are being raided. I say 'bulls' as bulls are generally the chief offenders, they play havoc with the crops, either solitaries, in pairs, or as leaders of herds. The experience in Africa has been, on a few of their leaders being shot, elephants soon recognise raiding crops to be an unhealthy pastime. It is only during harvest season, or for a month before, that the damage from elephant occurs. Ivory from elephants shot would be handed over to government and should cover the salaries paid out. A strong fence round fields will keep out most of the other animals that matter. The protection of human life hardly comes into the question as regards the cultivated areas of the Madras Presidency, except it be from elephants, and here again the shooting of solitary tuskers has long been advocated being as often as not potential rogues, and nowadays many of them are wounded by the muzzle-loading and cheap breech-loading guns of the Ryots in cultivation. Solitaries which are not necessary for the propagation of the species, generally hard to tame it captured, often frequenting public roads and bridle paths, are a terror to travellers, and sooner or later an accident occurs. I have said 'tuskers' as mucknas are not generally vicious, being usually of a docile temperament. One of the most important aspects of bird protection should be kept well to the fore: the necessity of showing the cultivator where he does wrong in killing out many of the species of birds found on his land, and for this purpose an ecological bird survey should be made of every province which will prove of immense value in demonstrating the birds that are the friends and the enemies of the cultivator. 10. Measures to restrict the possession or use of weapons which may be used for poaching. A great curb to poaching would be the recall of all guns issued for the purpose of crop protection; immediately harvesting is over, the issue of weapons to applicants must be curtailed; this is very important. Rewards should be offered, and paid out promptly, for information leading to the seizure of illicit guns, and action

120

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

taken to recover the weapons immediately information is received. What frequently happens is this: A Sub-Inspector of Police receives information that an illicit gun is to be found (either in a hut, a grain pit, a haystack or more frequently in a watchman's shelter on a tree). Instead of prompt action being taken days elapse before constables are sent to recover the weapon and in the meantime it has been removed. To my knowledge this has occurred time and again, the informers get no reward or compensation for their trouble, and so give no further information in regard to any other weapons they may get to know of. The same delay has been experienced over Range Officers taking action when illicit machans and hides are reported, even when instructed to proceed immediately to the spot by the District Forest Officers. A few days are allowed to elapse before action is taken, in the meantime the poachers get wind of the matter and the machans or hides are removed. A forest guard should be immediately dismissed if a poaching case in his beat is not reported by him. It is suggested that a Monegar, Village Munsiff, or Village Headman should be heavily fined if a case of illicit possession of arms is discovered in his village or villages under his jurisdiction. There is not the slightest doubt that every village Munsif or Headman knows exactly what arms there are in the village or villages under his jurisdiction, whether licensed or unlicensed.' Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 38 (1935), pp. 225-30.

Again exceptional comments by Morris. There was even a collective view where many felt the need to have a separate department to govern wildlife. Morris even wanted a special fund to be allocated for all conservation activities. He was an advocate for strict curbs and controls on weapons, and severe punishments and fines for those that violated the rules. Morris was also an advocate for protected areas. He had remarkable vision. Much of what he suggested then we need even today, but it has not happened. Which district administration in India today will recall all guns that have been issued for crop protection? Who today would effectively run wildlife wings with specially allocated

A CRITICAL PERIOD

121

funds? Does anyone punish forest guards for violations of the law? How many informers get the right rewards for their troubles? What a state we are in and that too in the twenty-first century! A young Salim Ali in his twenties in one of his first major writings on conservation assesses the Hyderabad state. This is the first Indian writing about the issues that confronted the forests and wildlife in the 1930s. No. 8: Hyderabad State By Salim Ali The Hyderabad State occupies an area of about 82,000 sq. miles of the Deccan Plateau. Its north-eastern boundary adjoins the Chanda district of the Central Provinces, renowned among sportsmen of the last century as an ideal game country. Hyderabad State at one time, not so very long ago, provided some of the finest big game shooting—especially tiger— in India, and even at the present day in spite of the penetration and colonization of the vast tracts of forest land and the consequent depletion of wild life, there still exist in the Dominions parts which are in no wise inferior to the best that can be found elsewhere within the Indian Empire. Some idea of the abundance of tigers in the last century can be obtained from the fact that the famous shikari Col. Nightingale (who died at Bolarum in 1901) alone killed during his service over 300 tigers, the majority of which were in Hyderabad territory. Status of Wildlife The wildlife of Hyderabad is as varied as it is interesting. Tigers are still comparatively numerous in the forests of the Eastern and Western Circles, which also contain some gaur. Leopards and sloth bears are fairly plentiful; sambhur, cheetal, muntjac, four-horned antelope, nilgai, blackbuck, chinkara, hyenas, wild dogs, jackals and wild pig are found in suitable localities, while there still remain a few cheetahs or hunting leopards and wolves. Besides these, porcupines and many other species of smaller mammals are found. A few buffalo are said to occur in the Eturnagaram Range of the Mulug Taluka (Warangal District) but their numbers are

122

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

very small. The shooting of buffalo and gaur has been totally prohibited for some years past, owing to which they have, for the time being, been saved from extinction. In his Reminiscences of Sport in India (published 1895) Major General E.F. Burton mentions a herd of twelve wild elephants near 'Percall' Lake in 1847, which were said to be descendants of animals that had broken loose in the wars about 200 years previously. In 1866 this herd had increased to fourteen or fifteen individuals. Nothing is known as to what became of them until the 1909 edition of the Imperial Gazetteer, which stated that there was one single female still left in those parts. Despite the above, however, Nawab Hamid Yar Jung Bahadur, the Inspector General of Forests, informs me that no elephants in a wild state have been heard of in Parkal Taluka within the memory of the oldest man living. Provision for Protection of Wildlife Up to the year 1897 or thereabouts, there were apparently no restrictions in Hyderabad against tiger or any other shooting. The present Game Regulations came into force from 28 September 1914. For the purpose of their application, the Dominions are divided into four circles which include both reserved and open forests. They also include Jagir and Samastan forests as well as the private Game Reserves or Shikargahs of His Exalted Highness the Nizam. The Paigah Nobles, who have extensive estates (the largest being that of Nawab Moin-ud-dowla Bahadur which covers an area of 1,287 sq. miles) the owners of Samastans, and the Jagirdars manage their own forests and are entitled to regulate shooting on their private domains. The rules relating to close seasons, shooting of does and immature animals, and the restriction against shooting buffalo, gaur and hunting leopards are, however, applicable to them Theoretically speaking, therefore, no shooting can be done in the State without either a licence from the Government or a permit from the Paigah Nobles, Samstan-owners or Jagirdars concerned. According to the Game Regulations only one circle is thrown open for shooting each year from 1 March to 31 May and again for ten days at Christmas. For blackbuck the open season is 1 December to 31 May. Only the number of districts comprising such circles are open at a time,

A CRITICAL PERIOD

123

and shooting areas in these open districts are also defined. Certain areas are thrown open and others closed to tiger shooting from time to time depending upon the increase or decrease of these animals. Depletion of Game Animals In spite of the measures promulgated for the protection and preservation of the fauna, which theoretically speaking should give adequate protection to the existing species, Hyderabad unfortunately is no longer the prolific game country it was during the last century, and even during the past thirty years there has been a steady and perceptible diminution. The chief causes of the decline will be analysed later; in the meantime it is interesting to collate the present conditions with whatever little information we can gather concerning the recent past. In the middle of last century the country between Hingoli and Bokar (Nander District, Western Circle) was famous for tiger and Col. Nightingale shot many of his animals here. In two seasons (March-April) 1897 and 1899 Brigadier General R.G. Burton of the then Hyderabad Contingent, killed twentysix tigers in Sirpur-Tandur, mostly round Jangaon—the present Asifabad. On his last visit to this district in 1899 he still found tigers as numerous as ever, and heard fifteen years later that they were just as abundant. He always thought there was a great breeding ground of tigers in the stretch of Hyderabad territory south of the Peinganga River in the Bela and Rajura talukas of the Sirpur-Tandur district and sees no reason why it should not now be as full of tiger as it was thirty-five years ago. Whatever the reason, those conversant with modern conditions in Hyderabad will agree that this is unfortunately not the case. The Ajanta Range all along the Khandesh border north of Aurangabad to Kannad was also famous for tiger in the early part of the last century, but now merely harbours occasional stragglers. There were a few herds of gaur in Sirpur-Tandur in the 1890s. One whole herd was reported to have perished from foot and mouth disease at Maikgarh. These animals are now very scarce, and though I often heard of their occurrence, I actually saw only one pair at Utnoor, and from the footmarks I came across in that part of the country they were obviously rare. Inspite, however, of the total prohibition of the killing of these bovines, I came across more persons than one who boastfully claimed to have shot them in recent years!

124

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Jerdon, in the first quarter of the last century, referred to herds of thousands of blackbuck in the country around Jalna. According to Col. R.W. Burton there were in 1897-1903 blackbuck and chinkara along the railway line between Secunderabad and Manmad, but fast being wiped out. In 1892 he saw herds of many hundred blackbuck when marching through the country. In 1903 these herds had dwindled to a dozen to twenty, not more. Though still fairly plentiful in some of the remoter parts of the Mahrattwada districts, blackbuck are fast disappearing with the advance of colonisation and increasing facilities of swift transport, coupled with a complete disregard on the part of the man with the gun for age, sex or season. Herds of more than a few individuals are now uncommon, and heads of any decent size difficult to find. My work in connection with the recent Hyderabad Ornithological Survey (1931-32) took me to many parts of the country once famous for game, and I made a point of investigating as far as possible into the present state of affairs. On the whole, it seemed to me that compared with accounts of even as recently as thirty years ago, the condition is distinctly poor, and this conclusion has since been confirmed by the State Inspector General of Forests. It is true that tigers are still plentiful in certain portions of the Godavari Forest Belt, but a rapid diminution in their numbers is inevitable if the present attitude of apathy is persisted in and things allowed to drift as now. Moving about the country as a non-official outsider, I had many opportunities of entering into conversation with people in every walk of like from whom much useful information could be gleaned concerning the subject. Moreover, once their initial suspicion was allayed and they perceived that my interest was chiefly confined to collecting birds, they came out with a good deal more about their exploits with the larger game animals than it would have been possible to extract by direct cross-examination. All I had usually to do was to lead them up to a point and leave them to damn themselves! Even after due allowance for bravado and for shikaris' tales, the magnitude of the wanton destruction of life that goes on everywhere, was manifest. What struck me as curious was that inspite of the formalities and obstacles in the way of getting shooting licence and the limits of bags, as prescribed under the Regulations, almost every man possessing a gun

A CRITICAL PERIOD

125

boasted of the number of tiger, sambhar, cheetal, often gaur and other game he had shot and was still continuing to shoot! The more discoursive ones could, with sufficient encouragement, usually be made to reveal the objectionable methods they employed, which they often did, not unmixed with a certain measure of pride in their achievements. In the course of my wanderings in the forest at Nelipaka (in the Paloncha Samastan), Amrabad, Utnoor and elsewhere, I constantly came upon machans built on trees or pits dug round the edges of swamps or pools in nullah-beds, etc., from whose concealment these relentless gunners slaughtered every animal that came to drink, regardless of the season or whether it was male, female or young. A petty police, revenue or forest official who hears guns popping off almost every night close to his village even in seasons when there are no crops to justify them, can usually be induced to 'keep the peace' if he receives a leg of venison as hush-money. I say this with first-hand knowledge, and it is a fact known well enough to many of the higher officials with whom I had occasion to discuss the question, but who are powerless to put a stop to the practice under prevailing conditions. Sambhur and cheetal are perhaps the worst sufferers, and in areas where they were plentiful as recently as 10 years ago, a marked decline in their numbers is noticeable. It is sad, but nevertheless true, that some of the greatest offenders are not the ignorant ryot and the village shikari, but directly or indirectly they are people like vakils, officials (usually, but not always, petty!) and well-to-do and so-called educated citizens who should know better. They either do the slaughtering themselves, regardless of regulations and time of year, or lend out their guns to professional shikaris, or encourage the latter indirectly by commissioning them to procure game for them or by readily buying up whatever is offered for sale at all times of the year. This indirect sort of abetment is not confined to four-footed game, but applies largely also to game birds such as partridge and quail. While on survey work on the outskirts of Aurangabad town in the second half of April (1932), I came upon a party of professional snarers complete with paraphernalia and decoy birds. Investigation showed that these men had been commissioned to catch bush quails for a dinner being given the next day by a military 'Burra Saheb' of the British Cantonments! These professional snarers—Pardis and others—are veritable pests, but

126

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

it is only thus that they are able to carry on their nefarious operations year in, year out, with the result that in many areas feathered game has been reduced to the verge of extinction. In the words of a highly-placed police officer who was also a keen sportsman and nature lover and strived at all times to ensure an observance of the Game Regulations, 'The man with the gun does not do half so much damage (to feathered game) as the snarer. He is like a broom, for he sweeps everything before him into his net.' Principal Reasons for Depletion of Game Some of the causes contributory to the rapid and steady depletion of wildlife in the Hyderabad State have been hinted at above. Many of them are the same as obtaining in other parts of India, but there are others which are peculiar to the Dominions and the direct outcome of conditions there prevailing. To tabulate them all, they are as follows: 1. Enormous and continued increase of population in the last two decades as shown by the Census Reports of 1921 and 1931. 2. Improvement, extension and opening up of new roads and railway lines (cf. the Kazipet-Beilarsha line and others) and the introduction and penetration of motor cars and buses, which combined with (1), are having the effect of throwing open large tracts of country that hitherto provided a refuge to wildlife. 3. The facilities provided by (2), in bringing distant game tracts within speedy and comfortable reach of the man with the gun. I remember that in October 1925, just after the monsoon, it took three days by bullock cart to reach Utnoor from Nirmal. There was no road most of the way and the journey had to be done over cart tracks little better than boulder-strewn ravines, and through swollen streams with rocky beds and steep muddy banks in which the wheels sank to the axle-trees. It was an experience not to be repeated in a hurry, however keen a shikari one might be. With the opening up of the Hatnur-Utnoor road, it is the main Nirmal-Adilabad road, the same journey was performed in 1932 by motor car in about as many hours! As Utnoor lies in the midst of some of the finest shooting country, the effect of this innovation on game can be imagined.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

127

In the exploits of veteran shikaris of the 1800s, like General Burton, one constantly comes across names of places in the State like Jangaon (now Asifabad) which it took him days of riding or marching to reach, and with an infinite amount of bandobast for his kit. 'The place is now accessible by rail and bus within a fraction of the time, and with no more bandobast than the purchasing of one's ticket! 4. Shooting from motor cars and buses both by day and by night is a growing menace. The practice has assumed alarming proportions since the Game Regulations were promulgated in 1914, and since it is apparently not contrary to law, it is freely indulged in by all and sundry. 5. The non-existence hitherto of the Arms Act and the easy availability of cheap guns of foreign and local manufacture, and of gunpowder and percussion caps for muzzle-loaders. 6. Indiscriminate poaching and slaughter of game for commercial purposes at all times of the year. 7. Wholesale snaring, netting and trapping of game birds such as partridges and quail, often at all seasons, and the taking of their e ggs8. Droughts and epidemics. 9. Wild Dogs. Remedies Suggested 1, 2, 3. Increase of population, clearance of forest lands, extension of cultivation and of transport facilities are the natural concomitant of progress, and it would be unreasonable to check these, except perhaps (1), for which suggestions are out of place here! No case can be made out for protection of wildlife at the expense of human interests. However, a strict observance of the Game Regulations in such areas should be enforced and punishments of a deterrent nature meted out to offenders uniformly, regardless of rank or social position. 4. Shooting from cars and buses, especially by night with the aid of powerful headlights and electric torches, should be made unlawful.

128

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

5. The recent introduction of the Arms Act into the State has not been a day too early. The restriction it will impose on the possession of firearms and on the purchase of ammunition, gunpowder and percussion caps should, if properly enforced, have a beneficial effect on wild life in course of time. 6 & 7. It is a fact that most of the poaching—slaughtering and snaring—is done for monetary gain and is encouraged directly or indirectly by people who have no excuse for pleading ignorance of the law. It is an axiom that if there were no receivers of stolen property, there would be not thefts committed which, in the main, is unassailable. Therefore, if the promiscuous purchase of the meat, hides and horns of game animals (except perhaps of game birds in season under a regulated system) was made illegal, as well as the sale of these articles, the chief incentive to poaching would be eliminated and a great deal of professional poaching would disappear. I suggest that as regards partridge and quail, areas should be set apart in rotation to remain entirely closed to snaring and trapping at all seasons, until such time as they become sufficiently replenished. The taking of eggs of all game birds should be made punishable. 8. Droughts can be remedied to some extent by the provision of reservoirs and by means of canals and channels leading from them. This has already been partly achieved in certain areas, cf. Pakhal and Nizamsagar Lakes, and others. In times of drought, such places tend to draw round them animals from distant parts and, wherever possible, adequate forest land should be set apart near such reservoirs to provide harbourage to wildlife at ordinary times, and specially in seasons of water famine. Epidemics According to the Inspector General of Forests, no epidemics among wild animals are reported, and no measures are taken to protect game in the forest against them. That measures are called for, however, is patent; an instance has been given above of a whole herd of bison being exterminated by foot-and-mouth disease near Manikgarh and the late Mr. E. Ogilvie, a District Superintendent of Police, informed me that some years ago

A CRITICAL PERIOD

129

hundreds of animals perished in the Warangal District in a similar epidemics. 9. Wild Dogs do considerable damage to game, and inspire of a recent suggestion that their ravages have been over-estimated, it cannot be denied that measures devised to reduce their numbers in certain other Indian States and Provinces resulted manifestly in a corresponding increase of such animals as sambhar and cheetal which are their favourite prey. It may be a fact that they actually drive away more game than they kill, but it is none the less true that they do considerable slaughter. Moreover, the game thus driven out often suffers heavily in an indirect way by being forcibly exposed to other dangers perhaps just as great, if not greater. It may, for instance, be driven from its forest fortresses to the neighbourhood of villages and cultivation, where it stands a good chance of falling to the gun of the village shikari or poacher, or in the case of young animals, to his dogs When I was at Asifabad, the surrounding country was overrun by wild dogs, in consequence of which forests said to contain a fair amount of game ordinarily, were bare. I shot a wild dog which was later sent with the shikari to the kutcheri for claiming the prescribed reward. The Tahsildar was wholly unaware of any reward having to be paid! Enquiries of the Inspector General of Forests elicited that some years ago rewards were paid for killing wild dogs (as per Clause 42 of the Game Regulations) but due to disuse this had become a dead letter and no rewards were now being paid. In my opinion, no case has been made out of the discontinuance of the rewards and the sooner they are reinstated the better. The existing Game Regulation, with perhaps a few alterations and additions, are sound enough on paper. Their application and enforcement is quite another matter. Mr. Hankin, a former Inspector General of Police, tried his best during many years, but though a forceful and able officer, it is doubtful if he was able to effect much. Neither have the authorities at the top relaxed their efforts since, but for all practical purposes the position has not improved. In my opinion the immediate way of dealing with the problem as far as the State is concerned, would be to form a

130

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

small committee comprised of a competent non-official sportsman and naturalist, and Forest, Police and Revenue officials interested to go into the matter thoroughly and de novo, and to investigate the exact present position of wildlife from district to district. Having once determined this, and with due regard to the varying conditions, they should be able to devise practicable measures for giving effect to remedies suggested above and to any others that may seem to them necessary. There are extensive tracts of forests in the State which might be demarcated and set apart as Wildlife Sanctuaries on the model of the National Parks now in existence in most civilized countries of the West. Three suitable localities suggested by the Inspector General of Forests for such reservation are: (1) along the cart track from Asifabad to UtnoorAdilabad District; (2) Amrabad-Mahbubnagar District; (3) around the newly constructed Nizamsagar Lake, Medak District. For the administration of the Game Regulations in other State forests, the need of creating a separate and efficient Game Department becomes imperative. This should consist of a Game Warden with a staff of assistants, and watchers of the right type. It should either be subject to the Inspector General of Forests and work in full cooperation with his department, or better still be directed by a small committee consisting of the Inspector General of Forests, the Inspector General of Police, the Revenue Member and the Game Warden (ex-officio). By a curious anachronism, shooting licences are at present issued by the Political Department. Whatever may have been the origin and desirability of this practice in the past, it is clear that the function should now be transferred to the Forest Department where it rightly belongs. Later it could be taken over by the Game Department. The present procedure has little to recommend it; it results in unnecessary inconvenience and lack of coordination which does not make for efficiency. After a proper investigation into the problem of wildlife conservation in the Nizam's Dominions, as elsewhere, it emerges more clearly than ever that at the back of all the senseless slaughter and law-breaking, which has brought about the present sorry plight, is the apathy of public opinion towards the need for the preservation of our fauna. The backing of public opinion is vital to the success of a campaign of this nature. Lectures and the exhibition of suitable cinema films should be organised in order to

A CRITICAL PERIOD

131

rouse the public from its apathy and make it realise the value and importance of wildlife, and appreciate the measures and the arguments put forward for its protection and preservation. A beginning must also be made with children in the schools, by means of properly arranged Nature Study Programmes. Dehra Dun 30th September, 1933. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 38 (1935), pp. 231-40.

In 1933 Salim Ali suggested a series of measures to resolve the serious problems of the wilderness of Hyderabad state. I think that over all these years nobody bothered to resolve them. Most of the area that Salim Ali talked about has been wiped out. Andhra Pradesh, be it the forests or the wildlife, is in a total mess. What about other areas? Let us examine the case of Mysore: No. 9: Mysore By Major E.G. Phythian-Adams, EZ.S. The State of Mysore is an elevated table-land varying in altitude for the most part from 2,500 to 3,000 ft. above sea level. The Western Ghats rising to some 5,000 ft. bound it on the west and break the force of the South-West Monsoon. On the south are the Nilgiri Hills and on the south-east the Billigirirangans, the highest point of which is about 5,000 ft. above sea-level. In the interior the country is undulating and in many parts hilly. Generally speaking the northern part of the State consists of open plains with occasional rocky hills, the centre is the most intensely cultivated, while on the western and southern fringes are the denser forests. The total area of the State is some 30,000 sq. miles of which forests cover over one-tenth. The forests are divided into: (1) Game Preserves which are closed to all shooting and fishing except by special permission; (2) State forests corresponding to Reserved forests in British India where the pursuit of game is illegal except on licence; and (3) District forests which now hold little but small game, panthers and wild pig.

132

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Mysore is the fortunate possessor of a fauna so diverse and varied that few other parts of India can equal it. The extensive open plains of the north are the home of numerous herds of blackbuck, which extend more or less over all cultivated areas of the State; the more broken country holds chinkara and wolves, while nilgai though uncommon are still reported to exist in certain parts. The forests contain herds of elephant and bison, and a good herd of sambhur and spotted deer, while lesser fry, barking deer, wild pig, etc. are common in suitable localities. The State contains some famous tiger grounds and panthers are ubiquitous, though hunting leopards are probably now extinct. Bears are fairly common in certain parts and wild dogs even more so. The list of indigenous small game includes the Great Indian Bustard, Florican, Peafowl, Jungle and Spurfowl, Partridge, Sandgrouse (two or more varieties), several species of Quail, Green, Bluerock and Imperial Pigeons, and the Indian Hare, to which must be added in the cold weather countless numbers of Snipe, Duck and Teal and some Bar-headed Geese, which find rich subsistence in the paddy fields and on the irrigation tanks with which the state is so well provided. As has been said above, the existing Game Laws are a model of their kind, but as has been found in other parts of India, it is one thing to pass a law and quite another to enforce it. The public generally and many even of the subordinate officials appear to have no knowledge of the existence of these laws, far less of their provisions, and poaching is widespread and largely unchecked. Public opinion is not yet sufficiently educated to realise the importance of the preservation of the fauna, and until the scope and purpose of the Game Laws are more widely known, it cannot be expected that their provisions will be generally observed. Much good would be effected if the subordinate Government officials of all departments concerned were made to realise their responsibility in the matter, and this applies with particular force to the Forest Range Officers who if they like can put a definite stop to all poaching. But still more important is the education of public opinion which can best be effected by propaganda in the Press, by lectures and nature classes in schools and colleges, by the formation of local associations for the study and protection of wildlife, and by collaboration with similar societies already existing in other parts of India.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

133

Equally important is the creation of a Wildlife Fund to which would be credited all revenue from arms licences, shooting and fishing licence fees,finesfor offences, etc. while the Fund would be used to pay rewards for the destruction of vermin, for preventing poaching, and for the upkeep of a Game Warden and National park. At present there are in the State no sanctuaries for wildlife, though to a certain extent the Game Preserves take their place, but a stricter supervision is required if these are to fulfil a really useful purpose. It is suggested that part of the Bandipur Game Preserve might with advantage be turned into a National Park. This area holds a good head of game and wild life generally, and being adjacent to the strictly preserved Mudumalai forest under control of the N.G.A. could be easily policed. Bandipur lies on the main road some 50 miles equidistant from Ootacamund and Mysore City, and a well-organised Park there should prove a great attraction. The existing Travellers' Bungalow could be easily enlarged to provide the necessary accommodation. There is no doubt that the presence of sportsmen in shooting areas is one of the greatest curbs on the activities of the poacher, and more encouragement should be given to them by reducing licence fees which are at present excessive in comparison with the bag obtainable and by throwing open to the general public some at any rate of the Game Preserves. Legislation is also required to prevent the sale of game in the close season; this would considerably restrict the activities of the motor poacher who shoots solely for gain. To sum up, the present position of wildlife in Mysore is, considering all the factors involved, not unsatisfactory; but this position will certainly deteriorate seriously in the near future unless steps are taken to prevent it, in which connection the following are suggested as most important: (1) Strict enforcement of the existing Game Laws; (2) Education of Public opinion in every possible way; (3) Formation of Wildlife Fund; (4) Prohibition of all motor car shooting; (5) Prohibition of sale of game out of season and control of traffic in hides and horns;

134

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(6) Protection for the Great Indian Bustard; (7) Encouragement of genuine sportsmen; and (8) Establishment of a National Park. Mysore has been blessed by Nature with an unusually rich fauna, and every possible step should be taken in time to safeguard it and to make its people realise the importance from every point of view of such a national asset. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 38 (1935), pp. 241, 244-5.

The writing of the 1930s was remarkable. There were at least twenty people writing and making appeals to save wildlife. There were all the big names. Corbett, Champion, Salim Ali, Jepson, and so many more. Jepson even compared wildlife with the Taj Mahal, something I often do in my talks. Over the century, human minds have searched for answers and some of the ways in which this process worked has amazing connections—whether it be today or sixty-six years ago—as can be seen in the following extract from Stanley Jepson: An Appeal for the Preservation of Wildlife By Stanley Jepson There is nothing selfish or incongruous in the idea of sportsmen taking up the preservation of wildlife. They are in the best position to do so and in India and Africa have always supported these movements—people who spend leisure hours in the jungle soon become very keen on the preservation of the wild. Were the Taj Mahal at Agra to be allowed to fall into ruins, or to be destroyed by vandals, a cry of indignation would arise from north to south and east to west of the Indian Empire and of the world. But the hand of man could re-create this structure. Yet several equally beautiful works of the Creator, rare species in the rich and varied fauna of India, are threatened with complete extinction and the hand of no man can recreate them. No howl of indignations arises. As the years go by, people

A CRITICAL PERIOD

135

seem to grow apathetic to the need for some action to preserve India's fauna for posterity. Then there arises the question of game sanctuaries. The formation of these on lines which have proved so successful in many countries should surely commend itself to the Government of India without delay. Mr. Dunbar Brander has mentioned in the 'Bombay Natural History Society's Journal' one very suitable area in the Central Provinces, and other places might be selected within motorable distances of Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, etc. Thus, visitors would have an opportunity of seeing wildlife in its natural surroundings. Such sanctuaries would be under a separate Game Department with a warden in charge, and shooting would, of course, be permanently forbidden. Or Government might sanction a local increase in the F.D. staff for the special purpose of protecting the sanctuary. There is ample information available about game sanctuaries in other countries. In Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the Union of South Africa large areas have been reserved which offer security and shelter to wildlife. Other countries have rapidly followed these Empire examples. Switzerland has her national park amid Alpine splendour. Italy and Spain have established similar areas. Sweden surpasses all Continental countries with her fourteen national parks. Finland, Austria, Poland and Czechoslovakia have such districts. Belgium has in the Congo that great sanctuary the Pare National Albert, created by royal decree in 1925, and providing so successful that four years later its area was increased tenfold. An example to India has been set by Travancore State where the Maharajah is personally interesting himself in the formation of a large sanctuary on the shores of Periyar Lake to give a sure refuge to the elephant, bison and other species which are about there. There may be nervousness about the financial liabilities in setting up a game sanctuary. This aspect rightly demands careful study. But there is encouragement in the history of the Kruger National Park in South Africa. This covers over 8,000 square miles of territory, and contains the best collection of wild animals anywhere in the world, while its 500 miles of motor road bring tourists and photographers from all parts. The Park fully justifies its existence by increasing revenues to the State. Such sanctuaries, however, should be run on scientific game-keeping lines, with effective supervision; otherwise experience has shown that

136

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

they may merely encourage quiet poaching in out-of-the-way forests. When nalas have been closed in Upper Kashmir and Ladakh in order to increase the number of markhor and ibex, the authorities have at times had a rude surprise on reopening them to sportsmen after some years— one or two nalas were found to be completely devoid of big game. The same experience occurred once in Sind, where an effort was made to preserve the Sind ibex through closing certain areas—with the final result that the ibex disappeared from those areas. One of the main benefits such sanctuaries would give would be the arousing of public opinion to the value of India's rich and varied fauna. It is surely an anachronism that while most other countries have big game sanctuaries, India with her fine religious traditions which give protection to animal life, and with a selection of wild animals amazing in its numbers and variety, was until recently doing nothing to arouse public opinion on this point. Stanley Jepson (ed.), Big Game Encounters.

The 1930s were busy times. People came together in the interest of wildlife. Wildlife needed them. The 1935 all-India conference on wildlife brought people like Corbett, Morris, Champion, and many others together. It also saw the birth of the journal Indian Wildlife, the official organ of the All-India Conference for the Preservation of Wildlife. Given below are some extracts from the first issue that provide a flavour of those times. The editors included Corbett and Morris, and then once again, the name of another Indian Hasan Abid Jafry. This was their first editorial: Editorial (Editorial Board: Major J. Corbett, Randolph C. Morris, Hasan Abid Jafry) No apologies are needed in sending forth a frail paper boat on a mission worthy of a modern Liner. The very project by its circumstances is rash and reckless. Dangers of an hazardous adventure are all too apparent, and, even if the craft is trailed along coast lines, a puff of breeze is enough to flounder it! We concede that many highly successful enterprises have

A CRITICAL PERIOD

137

had humble beginnings, but the plans and charts before us urge us to embark on an ambitious voyage that needs the courage and experience of a Columbus or a Vasco de Gama!! We are engaged in changing the mentality of a people, and desire to introduce a new angle of Cision—a new system of thought—an altogether new attitude of mind towards the Fauna and Flora of India. Europe, America and Japan appreciate the value of wildlife. They rightly look upon it with pride, consider it a National asset, and spend millions of pounds to save and preserve it. But conditions are different in India; National pride or economic considerations have little to do here. The reason is not far to seek. Religious veneration for 'life in any form', and abhorrence at its destruction, like many other religious dogmas ended in mere passive recognition of a tenet! It failed to create active love for wild birds and animals, so that while the majority of the people desisted from killing or destroying wildlife, they took no interest in saving and protecting it. Similarly, Muslims in India who having confused the religious permission 'to hunt' in cases of absolute necessity with a free licence to kill recklessly for pleasure sake, never considered, en masse, to love and preserve wildlife. This produced a strange mentality, and provided unrestricted scope for netting, capturing and killing. Since the time of Asoka, wildlife has not been seriously considered King's property. For centuries wild birds and animals have been netted, trapped and shot, here, there and everywhere, as 'God's creation and destructor's property'. Their capture and destruction has been sanctioned by usage from time immemorial, and game has been followed everywhere. Owners of land never objected, as they witnessed the practice and heard of it from their elders. Conscience rarely bothered the captor and the hunter; and 'trespass' and 'poaching' were almost unknown terms. Sanctity of case law in India, on these matters, amply justifies our conclusions. Destructive methods have always been employed in India as elsewhere, but fortunately, the number of destroyers and opportunities for destruction have been not too many. Demand for the table was little; firearms were few and shooting was an expensive hobby. Firearms and licences for crop protection were almost unknown, and commercial possibilities were definitely limited. But now, with the introduction of

138

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

modern firearms, commercial possibilities, gang methods, and the use of motor cars and searchlights, wild birds and animals are alarmingly reduced, and many species are threatened with complete destruction. Game was plentiful and was found in all parts of India; but within the last thirty years, it has passed through the most destructive period in history. It is but a modest estimate that within these years it is reduced by 75 per cent! India is blessed with at least 2,700 species of Birds alone!! She is richer than Africa in the variety of wildlife, but is certainly poorer in number, though Africa is one of the most heavily shot countries and has been attracting sportsmen and poachers of all kinds from all parts of the world for a number of years. African wildlife is being systematically protected. India is in utter confusion! Inadequacy of legislation, unwillingness on the part of subordinate government officials and public servants to enforce the existing laws and orders, and general apathy of the public, through sheer ignorance and for want of proper educative bodies, India is beset with many difficulties. The problem is acute, and unless bold measures are adopted, and movement for protection of wildlife is brought to the forefront, no effort on the part of legislators, sportsmen and friends of wildlife will be able to save it. India is hopelessly ignorant of the significance of her wildlife, and there is not a single Province or State which is contributing anything or making efforts, to remove this ignorance, and educate public opinion to realise its responsibility towards creatures which have played no small part in making the country fertile and inhabitable, by doing positive service in the protection of crop, the growing of fruits and vegetables and the production of beautiful flowers and plants. We started the Association for the Preservation of Game in U.P. as no one could be persuaded to take up the responsibility of forming and running it. Having done educative work for three years in India, we suggested the formation of All India Conference for the Preservation of Wildlife. Again we were compelled to shoulder the responsibility, and were able to found it with the help and support of friends. Fortunately, His Excellency Lord Willingdon, who has done more than any other Viceroy for wildlife, graciously accepted our humble suggestion through Provincial Governments and was pleased to call the All India Conference for the Protection ofWildlife, in Delhi, in January 1935. The Conference

A CRITICAL PERIOD

139

was an unqualified success and was responsible for excellent resolutions. But the Conference is over, the resolutions are on paper, and although more than a year has passed, we are not aware that any serious effort has been made in any part of India to give practicability to any of the resolutions. The geographical distribution of wildlife is such, that an All-India platform is an absolute necessity, and it is for this reason that we are obliged to keep alive the Conference for the Preservation of Wildlife, and we sincerely hope that we will be able to persuade the Provinces and States of India to take positive steps to save the valuable and wonderful wildlife. The Conference is a representative body and has its members from all the Provinces; in fact, we are flattered with the welcome it has been given by prominent public men and responsible Forest officers. The Magazine will be the herald of the Conference, and if the friends of wildlife in all parts of India will only give their support to the venture, we are sure, it will soon become a powerful advocate of the cause of wildlife in India. There is yet another reason for bringing out the Magazine. There is no Sportsmen's nor Naturalists' monthly Magazine in India. It will be our earnest effort to keep our readers informed of the activities in the cause of wildlife in Europe, America and the Eastern countries; give publicity to the views of sportsmen and naturalists; establish inter-states and inter-provincial relations; provide a medium for exchange of informations and publish latest Rules and Orders of Forest and Government Departments regarding wildlife. We undertake to publish entertaining stories, adventures and many other interesting matters about wildlife. In short, it will be our endeavour to give a readable Magazine to public at almost cost price. We have confessed the frailty of the 'paper boat', and have no hesitation in admitting that we are producing the Magazine under exactly the same circumstances as were responsible for bringing into being the Association for the Preservation of Game in U.P., and All India Conference for the Preservation of Wildlife. We are the publishers of the Magazine, as no publishing house is prepared to take it up except on the basis of a large profit to itself. This will naturally increase the annual subscription, and we are not prepared for it. It rests entirely with our generous readers and friends of wildlife to enable us to make the Magazine bigger, more

140

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

attractive and useful—in fact a success, in every sense of the term, in the interest of a very worthy and noble cause. We look to you for the ultimate success of the enterprise. A Prisoner for Life Major W.R. Lawrenson Once it was I who was 'Lord of the Jungle'. My home the wide forest, my roof was the sky. Now I envy the mongrel that prowls in the gutter. He has his freedom. A prison have I. What was my crime? Of what was I guilty? Nature's laws I obeyed. That, none can decry. Because of my strength, my power, and my beauty, I'm behind prison bars 'till the hour that I die. Oh! For a day to roam through my jungle, To recline once again 'neath the bamboos' cool shade. To list to the cry of the sambhur and cheetal. Disturbed by my mate as she moves through the glade. Oh! For a day to forget this mad torture. The thrust of the goad. The lock, bar, and chain. Oh! For an hour, to lie by the hillside. And once more to feel, the wind and the rain. Indian WMife, Vol. 1, No. 1, July 1936.

What an amazing time it must have been! The first wildlife conference in the history of India was just over and there was already criticism about the delays in implementing some of the resolutions. The editors were appealing for immediate action. For Corbett it was his first entry into serious conservation. Corbett may never have given up the gun but he spent more and more time with a camera. He bought his first camera in the 1920s and filmed for more than twenty years. His major achievement was his ability to get the local provincial government to create the

A CRITICAL PERIOD

141

Hailey National Park in 1935, now called Corbett National Park. By the end of the 1930s the journal he edited folded up because of lack of support. Only three issues came out. The last shoot he organized was in 1946 for Lord Wavell. By 1939 Great Britain was in the midst of dealing with World War II. In a way this was one of the worst moments for India's forests. It was a period of endless timber cutting, and contractors involved in this went after wildlife with a vengeance, forgetting about the rules and regulations that governed the area. After all it was a time of war. All the British were occupied with was the war effort and if not that, it was the heat of the independence struggle. It is estimated that over 300,000 cu metres of just sal was cut in these war years. In the early 1940s there was little writing on conservation and it was only after the war ended in 1945 that the writings started again. But it was a complex time as India entered the period of independence, the British got ready to leave, and the priorities of that moment relegated the forests of India to oblivion. In my opinion damage and destruction was at its highest at this time and wildlife suffered its greatest damage. The. 1940s must have been a nightmare for conservation and wildlife activists. Let us look at the situation in Udaipur region in Rajasthan in 1941. This was a feudal state and the British tried their best to interfere. The Second World War was on and in November 1941, Rao Sahib E.V. Padmanabh Pillai was transferred from Madras to Udaipur and he brought in a new Forest Act with stringent measures. He describes the state of Udaipur's forests as probably reflective of other regions of India. This is what he writes: Everywhere reckless felling was going on and wanton destruction was to be seen. The only thing that so far had protected the forests was the personal interest taken by the Ruler of the State in protecting certain areas for game preservation. The forests left by the Ruler to be managed by his Government had been mismanaged and ruined. When the town of Udaipur was founded [c. 1550], it was in the middle of thick jungles. Great lakes were formed by throwing embankments across the streams flowing down the hills . . . . Now Udaipur is surrounded by hills bare of vegetation. On these hills the soil is only a thin layer not more than 2 feet in depth. Rain beats on

142

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

these bare hill sides and washes away the surface soil little by little year after year exposing bare rocks. Thousands of tons of silt have been deposited in these lakes. There could be no doubt that in course of time these lakes would be silted up completely. This kind of denudation of forest growth from the hill sides was going on not only in the capital but everywhere in the State . . . . As the Prime Minister stated to the Mahasabha of Rajputs, noblemen and commoners, that if timely steps were not taken to preserve the forests the fair fields of Udaipur would in the course of the next generation be found deposited at the bottom of the Bay of Bengal. 'Udaipur—Report on the Administration 1940-42.'

And most of Rajasthan's forests today are probably sitting at the bottom of the Bay of Bengal! The following article gives an idea of the situation prevailing at the time of and immediately after independence: The Bombay Presidency By G. Monteath, I.C.S. It isfiveyears since I left India, and a good many more since I was last in some of the Forest districts in which I have served. Those that I knew are all, with the exception of Thana, in the Central and Southern Divisions of the Presidency. Sind and Guzerat; Surat, the Panchmahals, and the Dangs are 'terra incognita'. Anything I say therefore is subject to the qualification that my personal knowledge of conditions is limited to certain districts, and my experience hardly up to date. In some forest districts a heavy decrease in the numbers of certain species—those that afford, in addition to the sport of hunting them, desirable trophies—had taken place before the question of protection began to be considered seriously and rules were made under the Forest Act to impose some limit on killing. It must be admitted that up to that time—that is till after the beginning of this century—the main agent of destruction was the 'European' sportsman, to give him the title established by long usage in India. Neither the indigenous 'shikari' nor the wild

A CRITICAL PERIOD

143

dog—two kinds of poacher' frequently accused—can properly be blamed for it. To take the villager first—his share of damage done in the past in this part of India, where, as far as I have been able to find out, he has had no inducement of profit worth considering, is negligible, and his present activities hardly make enough impression by themselves to counterbalance the natural increase of the species he is generally concerned with. His usual method of hunting—a long and wearisome, and more often than not fruitless, watch by night, whether lawfully in his field or unlawfully and surreptitiously over water or a game-path in the adjoining forest— practically precludes such result. He is little, if at all, more efficiently armed, and it is scarcely to be supposed that he is better marksman or sees better at night, than his predecessors—most of whom, as Forsyth says, were bunglers at this kind of work. When a number of villagers combine, as they sometimes do—most often in my experience in the Kanara district—with nets or dogs or both, they may do a little better, but even these hunts are not on the whole, I think, much more productive of result than the solitary watch. The fact that they are illegal makes it necessary to keep them as dark as possible, and since they cannot be conducted without numbers and some noise, secrecy—unless there is connivance on the part of local subordinate officials—is not altogether easy. They do not therefore take place very often, and when they do the total result after a good deal of work, involving much careful preliminary investigation and placing of nets, hardly, according to my observation, warrants the conclusion that his kind of hunting causes any real decrease in the numbers of the species that is their main object—in the Kanara district for our purposes cheetal, which seldom go far from the comparatively easily worked forests adjoining village sites. I say 'for our purposes' because I am dealing just now with forest species that are in need of protection. Pig of course are hunted too—pig and cheetal are the two kinds of forest dwellers that do most of the trespassing on cultivation that villagers complain about—but pig are prolific and in no need of protection—in Kanara perhaps rather the contrary. Cheetal also, if considerably less prolific, have still a natural rate of increase that would more than counterbalance the occasional killing of a few of them by villagers, as long as this was all they had to fear. Provided that due care

144

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and discrimination are exercised in the matter of gun licences for crop protection, there is not very much danger that the occasional unlawful use of a gun will do more harm than it has done in the past, and the evidence seems to show that this has been inconsiderable. In fact, if the grant of licences for smooth-bore guns—which are all that is needed for protection of crops, and all that villagers usually want (most often singlebarrelled ones and nearly always muzzle-loaders, for financial reasons)— is proportioned to the area of cultivation (and of course conditioned by the respectability of the individuals concerned), inhabitants of forest villages will do very well, other things being equal, if they hold their own against deer and pig. If sometimes for the sake of meat one or another of them sits up with his gun in a forest, or a number of the 'lads of the village' combine for a hunt with nets and spears (in this case usually their only armament, for guns are noisy and likely to be more dangerous to hunters than hunted) and they happen to be caught at it, I should be inclined to be lenient with them. After all it is arguable that the motive is as good a one as the desire for a trophy, which if the animal shot is a large one—say a bison—often involves, in Kanara at any rate, almost entire waste of the carcass. Local Regulations: (1) Southern Circle. That the present state of things in the Southern Circle forest areas is on the whole, as I think it is, satisfactory, is attributable mainly or very largely to the fact that the 'block' system and attendant rules were introduced in good time, that is before the general use of motor transport had begun to make many parts of North Kanara so much more accessible than they were in former days. The restrictions imposed by the old rules— consisting of little more than the necessity, for the purpose of shooting in government forests, of buying a licence available for a year, and a limit of the number of head of certain species that might be shot by an individual licence—would hardly have been enough by themselves to counteract the effect of a much greater annual influx of sportsmen, with the inveterate tendency of the majority to follow one another into wellknown and favoured localities. The system now in force seems to provide as adequately as any set of regulations can against overshooting of those parts of the Southern Circle forests to which it applies by means of a threefold check.

A CRITICAL PERIOD

145

Sanctuaries To sum up, the system of licensing that is in force in the Southern Circle having so far proved on the whole adequate there for its purpose, its extension to other parts of the Presidency where there are considerable tracts of forest in fairly regular request for shooting seems desirable. In fact I can see no other means at present available by which the gradual disappearance of the species most generally sought after may possibly be stayed, or the stock increased. Nor can I think of any further measures in supplement that would be feasible. The establishment, for instance, of sanctuaries on the lines of the African Game Reserves (but of necessity on a smaller scale), which I have seen advocated for some parts of India, and which may (though I doubt it) be a practical proposition for them, is manifestly out of the question for Bombay, and likely to be so for a long time to come. Expenditure on a special establishment to look after them could never be justified, and the burden of supervising much larger areas closed to shooting, which would consequently fall on the forest staff, would be made no lighter for them—rather the contrary—by the absence as a matter of course of licensed sportsmen. Sanctuaries indeed other than those of manageable size provided under the rules by temporary closures of blocks, plus such natural ones as still exist in parts of different districts by reason of inaccessibility combined with climate, might very well in the end prove to be no sanctuaries at all. Wild Animals in Non-Forested Areas Antelope and gazelle (blackbuck and chinkara) when I left India had begun to disappear from many places where they used to be numerous, and doubtless the process continues. Here again local poachers' may be acquitted of blame, if one can call 'local' the peripatetic sort—Pardi, Haran-Shikari, or whatever his label. The ordinary villager seldom bothered his head about blackbuck, further than to scare them away from his crops. The others, from time immemorial, have wandered from one place to another—a gang of them does not want to camp long anywhere, and could not if it would, for they are 'criminal tribes' and the Police see to it that they move on. Their numbers are not large, and their painstaking method of snaring their quarry never produced results worth considering. They may do better with partridges and quail, or

146

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

hares—I am inclined to think they do—but on the whole they can be counted out. Nor for that matter did the toll taken by the sportsman in the past affect perceptibly the stock of these species—blackbuck quickly learnt to adapt themselves to the range of improved weapons, and the chinkara is seldom an easy mark. The extension of motor transport and the greatly increased number of licences for rifles are what has made the difference. The modern highvelocity magazine rifle of foreign make is cheap enough to be bought, even new, by many who could not have afforded the shorter-ranging express, and motor cars or cycles can go almost anywhere. Protection in Non-Forest Areas A licence for the possession of a rifle can be granted for the purpose of self-protection, of crop protection, or of sport, for all three purposes, or for any two of them. For self-protection a rifle is with rare exceptions unnecessary and unsuitable, and for crop protection smooth-bore guns are the most that is needed. Remains sport. In the first place, then, when that is the ostensible object, the licence would prescribe certain definite restrictions on the species of game, and the number of each, allowed to the holder during the period for which it is available. So much for the licence to own a rifle (or gun) for sport, and the condition to which it should be subject. The next thing to consider is the motor—privately owned, or public conveyance. It should be definitely forbidden, under pain of an adequate fine, to shoot from, or from the cover of, any kind of motor vehicle, and more especially to shoot by the aid of motor headlights. I believe this prohibition already obtains in forest areas. The provision that no shooting at all should be allowed from or within a certain distance of a highway should be added in supplement, but it must be admitted that in any case, since cars can be—and are—taken over the roughest tracks across country, it would in practice be chiefly the users of public conveyances that these prohibitions would affect. Still, that would be something. The last measure of those that I can think of is that to which I referred further back. The sale and purchase of meat or trophies of any kind of game animal, and not only such as can be brought within the definition of 'Forest Produce', should be made illegal, and the penalty should be

A CRITICAL PERIOD

147

heavy enough to make both buyer and seller cautious. It goes without saying that the bribery of subordinate officials, by the present for instance of part of the meat of an animal shot, is 'illegal gratification', and it is equally clear that it is an offence nearly impossible to detect: information offered by a jealous rival is about the only means by which it is ever brought to light. The Motoring Poacher It was in this context that I mentioned that it was time to get ready for another kind of 'poacher'—one very different from and a good deal more efficient than the resident variety—and this brings me back to the forests, where he has already arrived, though he has not as yet perhaps done very much execution on the whole. The opening up by means of roads for the exploitation of timber of more and more of the high forest areas puts more and more places that were previously hardly accessible within reach of the man who can command the use of a motor car. So far not much advantage seems to have been taken by the unlicensed shikari of roads other than the main Public Works routes that run through forest land, and little damage has been done to species other than cheetal—the most 'get-at-able' for the motoring 'poacher'—but quite sufficient. I am told, to them in some places to give reason for anxiety. If he widens his sphere of operations by taking to forest roads other species may suffer, but it should be easier to obstruct him here than on the public routes—he will be more noticeable and less mobile, and there is greater likelihood of his falling in with some of the forest staff. On the main roads I think the most that forest officers can generally do is to keep these gentry moving, but the illegality of shooting without licence should be emphasised by adequate punishment of the offender when he does happen to be brought to book—including attachment of his gun or rifle, which may be unlicensed, or if licensed has probably been brought outside the district for which it is licensed. Ordinarily of course a licence to possess a rifle—or even gun—for sport should not be valid beyond the boundaries of the district in which it is sanctioned. Agencies for the Protection of Wild Animals I said further back that the formation of larger sanctuaries than what the forest game laws afford, to be looked after by a special department, were

148

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

out of the question in Bombay for financial reasons. I add here my definite opinion that for forest areas they are also unnecessary. The officers concerned have managed the laws for the protection of game in their own sphere of authority efficiently, and can be trusted to do so in the future, so long as their discretion is not unduly interfered with. The example of Africa, sometimes cited, is clearly no precedent for India—I need hardly set forth the reasons, for that would be to elucidate the obvious. The motor car is likely, it is true, to be an increasing embarrassment, but a special Game Department would be, as far as I can see, in no better case than the forest staff for dealing with it. However, I am wandering into an academic discussion—a Game Department is anyhow not a practical proposition for Bombay. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 36 (1946-7), pp. 46-58.

It was clear that Monteath wanted little change in the Bombay Presidency. He was an officer of the Indian Civil Service and the preference for status quo was a part of his analysis. But it is quite clear that the last forty years had seen the decimation of India's wilderness. The twenty year period between 1927-47 was one of the richest in conservation writings and therefore, many must have at least minimised the damage. Many must have intervened by the crisis was clearly overwhelming. It was many years of World War II combined with the fury of the independence struggle, and a moment where battling for the wilderness was not a priority for governance. Even those who cared battled on God knows what would have been the situation today if they had not.

The great hunting trophy in post-independence India—thousands were slaughtered in the name of'sport'.

A fisherman's bag—the giant 'Mahseer that roamed the rivers of India. It is so difficult to find today.

The Nehru Years Independent India: 1947-1964

I

n the turmoil of independence I wonder if anyone had time to worry about wildlife and forests. Forests had been slaughtered during the war and more had been cut just before independence. If the motor car and its invention had started to take a toll on wildlife since the 1920s, its development, speed, and four-wheeldrive abilities took an enormous toll on wildlife in the 1940s just after the war. The world war, and India's independence, changed the priorities and everyone was focused on other issues. The wild bunch had other battles that they were forced into .The forest vanished and soon after independence the first shrill alarms sounded. In 1948 D. Dorai Rajan wrote an article in the Madras Mail appealing for the preservation of wildlife. One of the Britisher who stayed on was a great stalwart of conservation, R.W. Burton. Burton m u s t h a v e b e e n a really incredible force b e h i n d conservation in the 1940s. He not only wrote extensively, but was actually battling a brand new government in post-independent India and was keeping the flag of wildlife flying against all odds. Most at that time must have thought he was mad! The effect of the war and the state of wildlife in post-independent India had triggered another debate. But this time it would be tough. The country was now under Indian rule. The British who had stayed on wanted to see the wildlife safe, but there were very few Indian

150

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

voices in support of his. R.W. Burton swung into action. Corbett and Champion had left for East Africa. Corbett died there but Champion continued to work as a forester. They both probably did not believe that the wildlife of India would survive. This is what Burton wrote in January 1948:

Wildlife Preservation India's Vanishing Asset By Lt. Col. R.W. Burton This contribution to the Journal of the Society was in course of preparation when there appeared in the 'Madras Mail' newspaper of 6th January 1948 an article by Mr. D. Dorai Rajan under the caption, 'Preserve India's Wildlife—an appeal for Government action.' It is well that the first ventilation of this urgently important subject in the public press since the 15th August 1947 should have been put forward by a national of the new India. Mr. Rajan's plea deals with South India only, so a similar plea with regard to both the dominions into which this subcontinent has been recently divided is now placed before the members of the Bombay Natural History Society—which has been for many years in actual fact an AllIndia Society—-and the readers of the Journal, and through them to the pubic at large, the Governments of India and of Pakistan; all the Provincial Governments and rulers of States, and all owners of land. The Bombay Natural History Society For many years the Society, through the medium of its Journal and other attractive publications, has endeavoured to create and stimulate in India an interest in the wildlife of the country. During the past sixty years there have appeared in the Journal upwards of fifty longer and shorter articles and editorial on the subject. It was to a great extent owing to the Society that Act XX of 1887, 'An Act for the Preservation of Wild Birds and Game' (passed after nearly 30 years' agitation in the matter), was replaced by 'The Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act (VIII of 1912)

THE N E H R U YEARS

151

which, together with the Indian Forest Act (XIV of 1927) is the basis of all rules in force at the present time. Principles In all civilised countries there is a general recognition of the need for concerted and practical measures to stop the forces of destruction which threaten wildlife in all parts of the world. The principle is the same everywhere, the methods to be employed must vary in every country, and will also vary in different parts of the same country. That has special application to India as a whole, and is the reason why legislation on wildlife in this country has been complex and difficult. 'Until it is recognised that Wildlife is a valuable natural resource, and the benefits derived from an unguarded resource are wasting benefits, waste will continue until the resource has gone and the benefits have vanished. No natural resources is more sensitive to conservation than wildlife, and no natural resource has suffered more from lack of conservation. During the last sixty years species have been exterminated due to this deficiency.' Hubback

At present time the pace and extent of the waste is alarming. In this country there is the gravest need for concerted action. 'In its fauna and flora nature has endowed India with a magnificent asset. A further interest attaches to our wildlife from its association with the folklore and legendary beliefs of the country. It is an interest not confined to India alone, but which has spread among men of culture everywhere because of the esteem and admiration with which her sacred books and writings are held.' Prater

Birds Although birds are not now persecuted to the same extent as animals, yet an enormous amount of unnecessary and preventable damage is going on. One bright spot in India, as Champion has remarked, is that nongame birds are not harried to the same extent as used to be the case in some Western countries, for the Indian boy does not amuse himself by

152

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

uselessly collecting vast numbers of birds' eggs. But India had the dreadful plumage trade, which was far worse. The Great Indian Bustard is becoming increasingly scarce and has gone from areas where it was common not many years ago. The Monal pheasant and the Tragopan of the Himalayas have been saved only through prohibition of export of plumage. Other birds saved from what would have practically become extermination through the extremely lucrative plumage trade were peacocks and black partridges, egrets, junglecocks, paddy-birds, kingfishers, jays and rollers, orioles and a host of others. The governments controlling Pondicherry, Goa and other ports on the coasts of India cooperated so the traffic was stopped. But there were many subsequent cases of smuggling, and these will certainly recur if the plumage trade measures are ever relaxed. Value of Birds In connection with all that is written above the thought-provoking article, 'Bird Protection in India: Why it is necessary and How it should be controlled,' by Salim Ali, M.B.O.U., contributed in 1933 to the U.P. Association should be read by all governing bodies. Indeed it is most essential to national India that bird life should be adequately conserved. For 'Quite apart from a sentimental value, birds render incalculable service to man. Without their protection our crops, our orchards, our food supply would be devoured by hordes of ravaging insects. Birds are the principal agency that controls the bewildering multiplication of insect life which, if unchecked, would overwhelm all life on this planet.' Prater

Species in Danger Mammals—The Great One-horned Rhinoceros has only been saved by special measures and these, if in any way relaxed, will inevitably lead to its extinction. A close relative to the above, the lesser One-horned Rhinoceros (sondaicus), which has been within the memory of many an inhabitant of the Sunderbans jungles and other tracts, has completely disappeared—none now exist on the soil of India. The Asiatic Twohorned Rhinoceros which occurred in parts of Assam has gone from there for ever, and both these species are approaching the vanishing point

THE N E H R U YEARS

153

in Burma and other countries where they were formerly in fair number. In Burma the Thamin Deer is probably doomed to extinction. In Western Pakistan and neighbouring mountains the Straight-horned Markhor is rapidly disappearing; and if the Punjab Urial is not carefully preserved that specie will not long survive. The Indian Antelope (blackbuck) is becoming increasingly scarce and will eventually only be preserved through protection; to a less extent the same can be said of the Indian Gazelle. The Cheetah or Hunting Leopard, was not uncommon in the central parts of the peninsula but is now practically extinct in a wild state. The Wild Buffalo has almost gone from the areas east of the Godavari river where it was common not long ago; and it needs continued protection in Assam. The Asiatic Lion in India has only survived in its last stronghold through protection in the Gir Forest of the Junagadh State in Kathiawar. 'In many districts the larger animals have been totally wiped out. In others, where they were once common, they are now hopelessly depleted. There are a few parts of India where the position of wildlife is to some extent satisfactory, though insecure. Equally there are extensive areas where conditions are so appalling that, if left unchecked, they must lead to the complete destruction of all the larger wild creatures which live in them.' Prater

Year in year out there is terrible destruction throughout the enormous tract of mostly hilly and forested country comprising the Eastern States, from the Godavari river as far as Bengal, some of which are being now merged into India. The methods of the aboriginal tribes inhabiting this huge area (and other parts of India also) are those of extinction, for they net, snare, shoot all edible living creatures at all possible seasons and particularly during the hot weather months when water at the few pools is a necessary to all and tenders them an easy prey. In the Himalayan mountains also where control is difficult wild animals are definitely decreasing, and only to be found in any number in the more inaccessible places.

154

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Time for Decision The Governments have to decide without delay if wildlife is to be effectually preserved or the present lamentable state of affairs allowed to continue. In the latter event there can be but one result—the total and irreplaceable extinction of some forms of wildlife, with everywhere woeful reduction in number of all wild animals and many species of birds. There is no middle course. Half measures will be futile and waste of time. Wildlife is a national and natural asset which, if it is ever lost, can never be replaced. It is necessary that governments should give a lead, a strong and unambiguous lead. India and Pakistan should be proud to stand side by side with other civilised countries of the world in saving their fauna from extinction. In these days public opinion should recognise that flesh of wild animals is not necessary to human existence; but public opinion may not eventuate for many a long day. Meateaters want something for nothing and care not how they get it. Posterity means nothing to them. One instance. In November 1947 six shot carcasses of chital hinds were found with a man in a country bazaar in a British district. Police said prosecution doubtful because no evidence as to where the animals were killed. But a so-called 'Sanctuary' was not far distant. Burden of proof should be on the possessor. In any case Rules under Act VIII of 1912 must have been contravened and conviction could have been had. Legislation, and that very speedily, should absolutely prohibit offering for sale, possession for sale, or marketing in any way the hides, horns, flesh or any other part of any indigenous wild animal throughout the year. And, as was done by Notification in 1902 to suppress the plumage trade, so also should the trade in products of wild animals be stopped by prohibition of export by sea, and by land now that Burma is independent of India. It would appear that there is no possible objection on religious or other grounds to a general law throughout the whole country to the above effect. Profits are large and really deterrent sentences would be necessary.

THE N E H R U YEARS

155

Public Opinion At the present time public opinion as to wildlife preservation is almost non-existent in this country. It is only through public opinion that wild life can be saved and preserved through all the future years. Hear a great statesman of former days in another land: 'In proportion as the structure of a Government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.' George Washington

In these days that is done through the many avenues of propaganda. Enemies to Wildlife Preservation Forgetfulness—Indifference—Ignorance—Greed for Gain Laws are enacted, rules are made and forgotten, for there is no continuity of official enforcement and no public opinion to keep them in mind. India Within not many years Act VIII of 1912 was forgotten, the wide scope of its provisions unknown. The rules under the Act were ignored and its provisions a dead letter. 1933—'The Governor in Council has reason to believe that there has been little improvement in the administration of this Act and that subordinate officials are, not infrequently, offenders against its provisions, x x xx xx it is believed that sheer ignorance of close season is in many cases the cause of offences against the Act Guns and Greed Apart from genuine sportsmen, it is the possessors of guns and rifles who do the greatest amount of harm. In many cases it is not the actual licensee who does the damage, but illegal habit of lending or hiring out the weapon to others. Could the abuse of license granted as a personal privilege be stopped much good would result. But how is this to be done? Only through public opinion could it be effectually curtailed. So what? Suggestions as to Arms Act, if carried out, would do some good.

156

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

It is as a poacher that man is the great destroyer; and the main incentive is profit by selling hides, horns, meat—to a less degree, is it meat only. In some places local dealers finance the village shikari, providing him with guns and ammunition in exchange for hides, etc. Sambar and chital hides and heads are openly bought and sold in many bazaars and there is nothing to prevent it. Sale of trophies is common in many large towns and cities. To deprive sellers of their markets by effectively enforced legislation and through public opinion is the only way to remove temptation to kill for profit. If there were no buyers there could be no sellers. Utopia! Crop Protection It has always been pointed out, and is notorious, that crop protection and other weapons are used for the slaughter of game animals in adjacent and further forests regardless of all laws, rules, age, sex, season, or any other consideration whatever than profit. All this and other poaching is mostly carried on in government forests, for there are to be found more animals than outside them. So far as crop protection goes the argument in the mind of the cultivator is that if there are no animals the crops will not be eaten so he may well hasten the coming of the welcome day and meanwhile make money for himself and provide meat to the community. Guns The great increase over former years in the number of licensed guns is producing its inevitable adverse effect; and there is the mass of unlicensed weapons carefully concealed and constantly used. While the reduction in the number of weapons is admittedly a difficult matter—the withdrawal of crop protection guns during the seasons when the crops are off the ground and the guns not needed for legitimate use is a reasonable proposition. That would be of much benefit as those are the months in which they do the most harm. A suggestion from Assam was that crop protection guns now owned by villagers (more especially those inside government forests) might be

THE N E H R U YEARS

157

acquired by government for temporary issue at the right time and withdrawn when no crops, or for other season. It is not likely, however, that Provincial Governments would adopt these gun withdrawal suggestions on account of practical difficulties and extra work to District magistrates and other officials. A proposal advocated by many is that crop protection weapons should be licensed for cut-short barrels only. Cogent arguments against such modified weapons are that they are more liable to be loaded with buckshot, so causing many animals to be wounded and lost; are dangerous in hands of such persons as ordinary cultivators; and such restriction would cause and increase of concealed weapons for poaching. It has been demonstrated in South India by Colonel R. C. Morris that bamboo-tube rocket-firing "guns" are both cheap and effective for scaring crop-raiding animals and so enable a large reduction in the number of guns now licensed for ostensible crop protection. The Arms Act Some suggestions: Firearms licences are issued for— (1) Sport—These should be breech-loaders, and in case of rifles may be magazine weapons. Automatic weapons and muzzleloaders should not be licensed for sport. The former lead to indiscriminate firing, the latter to cruelty through use of buckshot, bits of iron, old nails, etc. (2) Crop and cattle protection—These should be smoothbore guns only; and being by law available at holder's residence only, due care on part of licensing officer can limit use of the weapon to within village boundaries only. These are surveyed and marked in forest maps so above entry would have effect of a conviction where otherwise a loophole might exist. Perusal of an annotated edition of Arms Act and Rules is illuminating as to number of avenues for escape of the wrongdoer under all categories.

158

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(3) Personal protection—The only weapons allowed, unless the licence is for sport also, should be revolver or pistol. A rifle or shotgun is easily robbed and just as easily turned against the possessor. (4) Display—This meaning 'show with ostentation' such weapons only as are non-lethal should be licensed for this purpose. In all cases licence should be plainly crossed with words 'Sport only' or 'Personal protection only, etc., as the case may be. Licences for possession of smoothbore guns are ordinarily issued on application and without previous enquiry. Other licences are issued to persons of approved character and status, this latter being as may be prescribed by the local government. Were the foregoing suggestions adopted there would be no real hardship to anyone, and wildlife might greatly benefit. Agriculture and Wild Life For purposes of wildlife conservation lands may be classified in five main categories: Urban, Agricultural, Waste, Private, Forest. Urban Lands (1) In these, measures should be taken for the protection of all birds. Areas actually under the control of municipalities or local boards could with advantage be constituted bird sanctuaries where the killing of, or taking the eggs of, any wild bird should be forbidden. The necessary machinery is at hand in Act VIII of 1912. In 1915 (vol. 24 p. 382) it was pointed out that the practice of taking the eggs of sitting pheasants and partridges is becoming increasingly common and to this malpractice the Act provides no safeguard. That suggestion has not been followed. To the above may now be added that it is a common practice to rob for food the eggs of indigenous wildfowl— the Spot-bill duck and the Cotton teal. The suggested amendment to Section 3 was addition of a clause regarding eggs and nests. This suggestion is now again brought to notice

T H E N E H R U YEARS

159

as desirable: 'To take or possess, to sell or buy, or offer to sell or buy, an egg or eggs or nest of any such bird'. Agricultural Lands Here lies the clash between the interests of Man and Animal; for which there are two main reasons. Firstly, the population of the country is increasing by about five millions yearly, so the areas under cultivation are extending, and must continually extend to the utmost limit, which means the continual absorption of all cultivable wastelands and secondary forest lands. Secondly, there is the imperative need of protecting present and future cultivated lands from wild animals. In some parts, where cultivation is contiguous to or near Reserved forest the depredations of wild animals present one of the most serious handicaps the cultivator has to face. The animals are not only deer and pig and some species of birds, but nilgai, monkeys and parrots which are protected by religious beliefs. 'Human progress must continue, and in the clash of interests between Man and Animals human effort must not suffer. But this problem has been faced by other countries. Cannot a reasonable effort be made to face it in our own? That an intensive development of the agricultural resources of a country may accompany a sane and adequate policy for the conservation of its wildlife is shown by the measures taken to this end by all progressive countries.' Prater

But in those countries there is universal literacy, a people easily educated to a proper public opinion, and where the masses do not clamour for possession of guns and rifles and even for repeal of the Arms Act. Wastelands These are beyond redemption as to wildlife, and in any case all that are at all cultivable will soon be merged with Agricultural lands.

160

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Private Lands The general consensus of opinion is that in most ordinary tracts the position is hopeless. The people have been educated to destroy, and there is no agency to stop it. Only through the owners themselves and through propaganda can any change be wrought: and before these operate the position is likely to be beyond any remedy. The Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act, 1912 deals with the right of private owners only in so far as it prohibits the shooting of the specified animals whether on private lands or elsewhere. This prohibits private owners killing females of deer, etc., and killing during prescribed close seasons. Government Forests These are several kinds and mostly under the Forest Department, but some are under Revenue Department; none of the latter are Reserved Forests. While it is essential that the cultivator should have reasonable latitude to defend his property, it is equally essential that there should be certain areas of reserved forests, where the laws and rules for protection of wild life are, or should be, rigidly enforced. Legitimate Sport Shooting rules and licence conditions for reserved forests as at present framed for the several provinces and districts, also for some of the larger states, are good and well adapted to local conditions. They provide against all conditions, all malpractices, including the motor vehicle and use of torch against deer. Licence fees are on the whole rather cheap; and where the shooting block does not obtain, and district or forest division licences are issued for a whole year on payment of a very small fee, the introduction of the Block System would cause a larger number of sportsmen to visit the forests. This is productive of much good, for when right-thinking sportsmen are in the forests, poaching is held in check for the time being; and the sportsmen can (or should) report such malpractices as come to his notice.

THE N E H R U YEARS

161

The short-term license system also enables the controlling officer to regulate the number of species, whether deer, etc. or carnivore, for each block in his division. Such control preserves the balance of nature and aids efficient protection. Where a change is necessary is the adoption everywhere of the Assam arrangement by which the sportsman has to pay a fixed royalty for each animal shot by him under his licence. The system makes sportsmen more careful as to animals they shoot at, and aids needed funds for a Wildlife Department. Wildlife and/or Game Associations Where these exist they are, if well organized and conducted, wholly productive of good. There is the Association for the Preservation of Game in the United Provinces through which the All-India Conference for the Protection of Wildlife was held at Delhi in January 1935 and the Hailey National Park established in the Kalagarh Forest Division. At the Conference it was declared that, 'Indian Wildlife could only be saved by Public Opinion, and that legislation, however efficient, could do little in matters like these without the wholehearted support of the Public.' How true. Where is the Public Opinion? Where is the support of the public? What is the state of wildlife at this thirteen years later date? In Northern Bengal are three shooting and fishing associations: 1. Darjeeling Fishing and Shooting Association. 2. Tista-Torsa Game and Fishing Association. 3. Torsa-Sankar Game and Fishing Association. In Madras is the 69-years-old Nilgiri Game Association but for which little wildlife would now exist in that district. Continuity of purpose, efficient control. In 1933 an Association for the Preservation ofWildlife in South India was inaugurated at Madras by the then Governor of the Presidency, but it came to nothing and has never been heard of since then. Continuity of Purpose-—Public Opinion these basic essentials do not exist. Without them there can be no effectual preservation of wildlife for posterity.

162

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Natural Enemies of Wildlife Tigers—Where in forest areas deer have been excessively reduced in number through poaching the tiger turns increased attention to cattle killing. The tiger needs the pursuit of deer to satisfy his hunting instincts, and where of nature in this respect is not unduly disturbed he is of benefit, as also the panther, to the cultivator of land within the forests and along its borders, for he keeps the deer and wild pig population within natural limits. But where the stock of deer is unduly reduced not only are all the deer killed out but the tiger is forced to prey on cattle: and as these are penned at night he is compelled to change his habits and hunt by day. That is when he takes great toll of grazing cattle and sometimes turns against the people also. Then the cultivators clamour for protection from the menace brought about by the unlawful poaching done by themselves and others. Panthers—These are less destructive to village cattle as they prey on sounders of pig and a variety of smaller animals ordinarily ignored by the tiger; but they also kill cattle and other domestic stock to a greater extent when the balance of nature has been disturbed. In areas where panthers have been unduly reduced through rewards for their destruction there has resulted such an increase of wild pig as to necessitate rewards to reduce their number. Even predatory animals (not wild dogs) have a distinct value as a controlling influence against overpopulation by species whose unrestricted increase would adversely affect the interests of man. The balance of nature cannot be unduly disturbed with impunity. Wild Dogs—These are wholly destructive of game animals and can be given no mercy. Rewards should not exceed Rs 15 for a larger sum induces frauds of several kinds. Disbursing officers should have by them skins and skulls by which to check those produced; and skins for reward must have tails and skulls attached and these be effectively destroyed when reward paid. Best methods for reducing wild dog population are through digging out breeding lairs, and strychnine poisoning of carcasses by instructed persons.

THE N E H R U YEARS

163

Crocodiles—In the jungles of India the crocodile is not the menace to human life that he is in Borneo, Sumatra, etc., and Africa. But where there are dry-season jungle pools in reserved and other forests crocodiles do an enormous amount of damage to all creatures, deer especially, which are forced to drink at those places. It should be the duty of the Wildlife Department to destroy as many of them as possible. Visiting sportsmen should also give help in the matter. Unnatural Enemies Cattle diseases—A great cause of much periodical mortality to buffalo and bison is through rinderpest. Against the introduction of this by grazing cattle effective action has been found impossible. Crop Enemies Elephants—Effective legislation was enacted in 1873 and 1879 to protect the elephant. In these days of mechanical haulage the preservation of these animals is not necessary in such large number as formerly. In some areas it is now very definitely necessary that regulated thinning out of herds and crop protection methods be initiated to protect landowners and cultivators from the great damage they suffer. This should be done by the suggested Wildlife Department on systems to meet local conditions. Wild Pigs—Deer and the like are crop raiders, but it is the wild pig which is the principal crop destroyer both in the open country, adjacent to the forests and within the forests. Where the balance of nature has not been disturbed the larger carnivores take care of the surplus pig population harbouring in the forests. It is not by the lone-working cultivator with his gun that any impression is made on the number of pig. Some 25 years ago it was realised by the Bombay Government that damage to crops by wild pig amounted to crores of rupees. Measures to deal with the trouble outside reserved forests included clearance of cactus

164

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and thorn thickets and other such coverts together with organisation of inter-village pig drives. Those measures will have had good results if continued as a fixed policy, but not otherwise. At the time of writing (end of January 1948) the Government of India have been asked by the Government of the Central Provinces to supply arms and ammunition for use of cultivators against wild pig. If the weapons are used against pig only, and at organised drives only, good may result, but if not so controlled they will assuredly be turned against the fast dwindling wildlife. National Parks Those who have knowledge of the subject are of opinion that India is not yet ready for these. The Hailey National Park, the situation of which conforms in most respects to conditions laid down for a sanctuary (Smith) is specially situated and may be a success. A full account of it would be welcomed by members of the Society. The Banjar Valley Reserved Forests area in the Central Provinces is perhaps suited for eventual status of a National Sanctuary (no Park). The case for it is outlined by Dunbar Brander. Buffalo, lost to it not many years ago could be re-introduced; otherwise it contains all the wild animals of the plains except elephant, lion and gazelle. Elephants are not wanted as there are plenty in other provinces. Even fifteen years ago the area was admittedly tremendously poached. Sanctuaries All sportsmen are agreed that these are of little use unless adequately guarded and, as that has not yet been found possible in India, such areas merely become happy hunting grounds for poachers from far and near. The constant presence of sportsmen of the right kind has been found the best guarantee for preservation of wildlife in reserved forests. There are however, tracts and forests where forethought and administration can, with the willing cooperation of the people if that can be obtained, do much to preserve wildlife for posterity.

THE N E H R U YEARS

165

Wildlife Department Forest Officers of the regime now ending have been of opinion that animals inside reserved forests should not be removed from the protection of the forest department and placed in the charge of a separate department. Their argument has been that the present system has worked well; such action would create resentment and alienate the all-important sympathy of the powerful forest department; and that a game department would be in no better case than the forest department for dealing with breaches of laws and rules. On the other hand, sportsmen and other with many years of experience are of opinion that under the present changed conditions forest officers, while not relieved of all responsibility, should be relieved of their present whole-time onus and share the burden of preservation of wildlife with a specially organised Wildlife Department. Why should not the two departments work amicably in liaison? There need be no friction. The appointment of Honorary Wardens has not always proved a success, not on account of any disagreements but because the conservation of wildlife is a whole-time duty which no man with other interests and work to do can efficiently perform. There could be Honorary Wardens to assist the Government Wardens and enthusiasts could be found for that work. In these days of intensive exploitation of timber and forest produce the work of forest administration has become more and more exacting and the officers find it exceedingly difficult to give time in office and out of doors to work which brings in no revenue and is considered of subsidiary importance. Would not Forest Officers welcome the considerable measure of relief which the formation of a Wildlife Department would afford them? Surely they would. Neither their pay nor their prestige would be in any way affected. It has been experienced that an unbribable staff of Game Watchers has been difficult to procure. That again is strong reason why there should be whole-time Wardens whose interest would be to prevent malpractices.

166

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

A Wildlife Department means that continuity of purpose without which all endeavour is of no avail. Money and Funds—The whole question is a matter of money. Wildlife cannot be effectually conserved without spending money on an organisation for the purpose. It is necessary to recognise the fact that there is an intimate connection between the revenue derived from wildlife resources and the amount of money that can be spent on conservation. This is the basis on which the financial policy should be built, together with the recognition that 'wildlife is a national asset and it is the responsibility and duty of the State to preserve it'. Therefore the fund will need such State grants as may be necessary to make the department effective, more especially in the commencing years. It should not be possible for funds to be cut off, reduced or abrogated by governments. The Wildlife Fund, as it might be termed, should not be within the control of any Finance Department, Central or Provincial. It should be established by law, kept apart from General revenues, earmarked for conservation of wildlife and protected from any possible raiding of it or interference by the Legislatures. Organisation Some suggestions: The Central Game Fund to be maintained in the office of the Ministry for Agriculture. The Wildlife Department to be linked through the Ministry of Agriculture with the Provincial and Forest Departments. Each Province to have a Provincial Warden, and as many Deputy Wardens as found advisable or necessary. These Wardens to rank with Conservators and Deputy Conservators of Forests respectively, and Game Rangers and Guards with corresponding Forest Department ranks. Should the idea of Wildlife Department be considered, a suitable committee could work out all details. Recruitment of staff would need to be through careful selection of applicants in all grades; and there would have to be deputation of some of the Provincial Wardens to America and other countries to acquire knowledge of principles, methods, and all details.

THE N E H R U YEARS

167

It is commonly said that it will take years and years to arouse public opinion as to wildlife. But we daily see what the present leaders of public opinion in this country can do in many ways vitally affecting the present and future lives of the masses, how speedily laws are enacted and farreaching measures put into motion. There is, for instance, the vast organisation for further education of the literates and the initiation of universal literacy for masses. There seems to be no reason why wildlife preservation could not also be given the highest priority. Some of the reforms could wait, not that they should, far from it, but the wild creatures cannot wait—and survive. Wildlife preservation does not only mean the protection of animals and birds, it means a fight against the destruction which is going on at an increasing pace—particularly against deer—and is not of Nature's ordering. It is simply asserting the right to live of the undomesticated animals and indigenous birds. The years are passing; this great national asset is wasting away. It is the duty of every government to preserve it for posterity. The urge should come form the highest levels. Propaganda Methods The time is now. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting could make it a routine matter to keep this subject constantly before all classes of the people. Special talks could be given on All India Radio, and other systems. The Educational Department could cause all governing bodies and educational institutions to issue pamphlets, organise lectures, lantern slides, and issue of suitable leaflets to all colleges, schools, and primary schools. All this could be worked out on the lines of the anti-malarial campaign which was an India-wide effort. But it must be a continued effort. For the literate classes there are the newspapers and other publications as media for propaganda; and for all classes there is the cinema screen.

168

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Suitable slogan could be devised and shown as a routine matter at commencement and during intervals of all cinema shows, accompanied twice a week by a short talk in regional languages. A Brief for Action 1. A decision by the Governments. 2. Issue of a general law to prohibit sale, possession, marketing of meat, hides, horns, etc., of indigenous animals and birds. 3. Enforcement of Arms Licence rules and conditions. 4. Enforcement of laws and rules under Act VIII of 1912 and Act XIV of 1927. 5. Formation of Wildlife Department. 6. Propaganda. 7. Generally all possible steps towards saving wildlife Through the continued efforts of their leaders the peoples of India were roused to political consciousness. Through their long-sustained efforts they attained political freedom. Will the leaders and people not now demonstrate to other civilised nations that they are equally capable of preserving wildlife for posterity? Surely they will. Because they should, and because it is demanded for the prestige of India. It was the intention of the Society and the writer to submit this pamphlet to Mahatma Gandhi with appeal for his powerful advocacy. Alas! It was not so ordained. Yet, in view of the late Mahatma's well-known sympathy with all things created, it may surely be hoped that the peoples of India and of Pakistan will respond to this appeal in accordance with what would without doubt have been his wishes and his guidance for the preservation of wildlife in this country. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 47 (1947-8), pp. 602-24.

R.W. Burton had, just after India's independence, summarized more then fifty years of conservation efforts, and in his treatise he spelt out his recommendations as well. He had observed the

THE N E H R U YEARS

169

devastation and his views were rooted in that detailed knowledge. How I wish his treatise had been submitted to Mahatma Gandhi before his assassination. Post-independence India was a horror for wildlife. Now, and with a vengeance, every forest officer's training commenced by 'shooting a tiger'. Travel agencies seduced the hunters of the world. They mushroomed in leaps and bounds. Forests were rapidly cleared using the magic word 'development'. The Maharajas went out to fulfil their wildest dreams of hunting and creating records. It was a free-for-all and few laws were followed or even enforced. Few cared and in the guise of development forest India was being gobbled u p with all its treasures. What would the future hold? Would people like Burton succeed? Would Salim Ali become a force? Burton continued to push for an agency to do the job of wildlife protection. It was now 1949 and he was seeing with his very eyes the deteriorating state of India's wildlife. He therefore battled on by continuously putting pen to paper. I am certain that this process minimized the damage. In fact his voracious writing was having its impact in the corridors of power in New Delhi. These were the early years of independence. Burton had put two long notes through the system. He saw the solution to India's wildlife problems very clearly. He stated at the conclusion of his second note: 'Without a wildlife department as suggested herein the s u r v i v a l of m u c h of the w o n d e r f u l wildlife of India is inconceivable and a great national asset will disappear never to be regained, as the majority of the unique species will become extinct.' What is amazing is that fifty-four years later we are fighting exactly the same battles as Burton fought earlier. Independent departments or separate ministries, it is all the same thing. The weird thing is that we are getting the same kind of responses as Burton got from the senior forest officers of the country. Does anything ever change? Finally a year after Burton's first note in 1948 the highest forest officer in the country, Inspector General of Forests M.D. Chaturvedi, was forced by Burton's writing to come up with the first so-called 'plan' to save the wildlife of India as was then envisaged:

170

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Preservation of Wild Life With Comment by Lieut. Col. R. W. Burton, L.A. By M.D. Chaturvedi, B.Sc. (Oxon.), I.F.S. Chief Conservator of Forests, and now Inspector-General of Forests and Vice-Chairman of the Board of Control Lt. Col. Burton is to be congratulated for the missionary zeal with which he has championed the cause of wildlife in India. Forest Officers who spend the best part of their lives in jungles get to know and love their animal associates to the extent of being jealous of sportsmen. The credit for whatever protection was afforded to our wildlife in the past goes to the lone forest officer who among his multifarious duties found time to enforce the game laws and apprehend poachers. In the United Provinces, it was at the initiative of the Forest Department that the first National Park in India was constituted. 2. Far be it from me to belittle the part played by eminent sportsmen like Col. Burton in riveting the attention of the public to the need of preserving wildlife. Officers of the civil and military services have rendered yeoman service to this noble cause. 3. While agreeing with much that Lt. Col. Burton has said in his valuable pamphlet on 'Preservation of Wildlife' and in the supplement issued later, I cannot reconcile myself with the view expressed by him that the interests of wildlife come in such sharp conflict with forestry, that forest officers cannot be entrusted with the task of looking after animals, a task which they have performed so well for the best part of a century. Theirs has been a labour of love. I do not deny our shortcomings, but I do feel that the contribution of several generations of forest officers towards the preservation of wildlife deserves better appreciation. 4.1 must confess, I see the advantages of organizing a separate Wildlife Department, the best justification for it being its ability to cover vast areas outside the reserved forests. In the early stages, however, the balance of advantage would lie in enlisting both the services and the cooperation of forest officers in the stupendous task of preserving wildlife. True, forest officers are not conversant with the modern technique adopted in

THE N E H R U YEARS

171

the preservation, control and protection of wildlife. But, what I submit for the consideration of enthusiasts like Lt. Col. Burton in that after all said and done, an average forest officer knows far more about wildlife than an average civilian or an agriculturist or even a sportsman. One wonders where the game wardens and upper grade assistants will come to be recruited from in Burton's scheme. In no other walk of life is even a nodding acquaintance with the animal kingdom available except in the forestry profession. 5. There is at present neither need nor room for organizing a separate Wildlife Department. Might I urge that the solution of the problem lies in the adoption of a middle course? The cadre of the forest department should be supplemented to enable it to organize wildlife preservation on modern lines. What is needed is not the creation of a separate department consisting of a large number of whole-time officers, a host of clerks, menials, orderlies and other paraphernalia, but the appointment of regional wildlife officers working in close collaboration with the existing forest departments and their vast organization for surveying, mapping, policing and maintenance of roads and rest houses. 6. The sort of organization which I envisage for the United Provinces is as under: (i) Provincial board for the preservation of wildlife. The Board will consist of the following members: (1) Honourable Minister in charge of the forests or his Parliamentary Secretary (Chairman) (2) A member from each of the two houses of legislature. (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

Enthusiasts from sporting circles Chief Conservator of Forests Director of Agriculture Director of Veterinary Services A senior Commissioner Provincial Wildlife Officer (Secretary).

The functions of this board should be advisory. It will be a sort of standing committee to advise government in respect of legislation to be enacted for the preservation of wildlife. The board will direct its secretary

172

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

to devise ways and means to enforce existing game laws to afford facilities for tourists and to secure protection from and for wildlife. The board will meet twice a year. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 48, No. 3 (1949).

Burton's comments on the above were again clear and strong. 'This constructive note is the first communication regarding my pamphlet received by the Society, or by me, from any officer of the Indian Forest Service. As such it is very welcome; also because criticism by an experienced officer of the forest department has much value. Mr. Chaturvedi appears to have overlooked the handsome and welldeserved tribute expressed in paragraph 8 of the supplement (published ante at pp. 290-9) to the many officers of the Imperial Forest Service who, throughout their service, worked continually and persistently to enforce wildlife protection and the laws and rules in regard to it, and to have them perfected. In paragraph 4 of his note the Chief Conservator sees the advantages of organizing a Wildlife Department. In the next paragraph he says there is neither need nor room for organizing a separate Wildlife Department, and advocates a middle course which he outlines in some detail. In other countries it has been found that half measures are futile and waste of time; and that there is in fact no satisfactory middle course. The Chief Conservator wonders where the wardens and upper grade assistants will come from. Surely it can be envisaged that the bulk of them will be obtained from among those of the Forest Service who have at heart, as has the CCF, the interests of the wild animals, and birds they have seen daily in the forests through the years of their service. Recruitment of staff would be through careful selection of applicants in all grades. All things have a beginning. Perhaps the scheme drawn up for the United Provinces by the Chief Conservator will herald the commencement of the much needed all-India policy envisaged in Section D of the proceedings of the Conference held at Delhi on the 8th-9th September 1948 to secure the implementation of a coordinated forest policy dealing with Inter-Provincial and national matters.

T H E N E H R U YEARS

173

There is no matter more wholly national than the effective protection and preservation of that Wildlife which is the Vanishing Asset of the peoples of this country. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 48, No. 3 (1949).

I would have agreed entirely with Burton. Half measures never work and are a total waste of time. If only the then powers that were had listened to Burton and created a separate wildlife infrastructure! 1 There was a great spurt in writings and interventions in the 1950s. It was a combination of post-war i n p u t s and postindependence India, and it was probably a moment where a wild bunch of people battled hard. In India at this moment the cheetah was about to vanish. But this was not just India's condition. It was the state all over the world. From the crisis had come the creation of a new organization. The International Union for the Protection of Nature (IUPN), what is now the IUCN, had just been set up. Lots of texts of new legislations got published for different areas. It was critical time for India's wildlife, probably because those who cared were witnessing massive devastation. By 1952 a Central Board for Wildlife was created, which is now called the Indian Board for Wildlife. It was in its first meeting that a second home for the Gir lions was suggested. Fifty years later we are still discussing the same issue. It was a moment where many mooted the establishment of associations for the protection of wildlife, something which is still a matter of importance within the NGO movement in India. It was a time when there was a great push forward for the creation of national parks and sanctuaries, probably because the rate of loss of forests was so high that those w h o cared no longer had other option. There was a great concern about the acceleration in the use of both motor cars and searchlights to shoot and hunt, and many who cared advocated a ban on both. The 1950s also heralded a series of 'State of India's Wildlife' reports, as an enormous effort went into minimizing the negatives by revealing the tragic state of affairs. This was true all 1. See Appendix I

174

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

over the world and even before the beginning of the 1950s the first international response to saving the wilderness across the globe had started. Burton describes the salient points of this 1948 worldwide effort. The International Union for the Protection of Nature By Lt. Col. R.W. Burton, I.A. (Retd.) The IUPN was established at Fontainebleau on the 5th October 1948. Thirty-three countries in all were represented at the Conference. A clear definition of the meaning of'Nature Protection' was given: 'The term "Protection of Nature" may be defined as the preservation of entire world biotic community, or man's natural environment, which includes the earth's renewable natural resources of which it is composed, and on which rests the foundation of human civilisation.' It was also declared that: '... ever more effective means for exploiting these resources (are required) and moreover soils, water, wildlife and wilderness areas are of vital importance for economic, social, educational and cultural reasons.' Also that: 'Protection of Nature is a matter of vital concern to all nations, and the furthering of it is the primary concern of no single effective international agency.' Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 49 (1950-51), pp. 809-14.

The IUCN, as it came to be known, could probably be considered in 1948 a revolutionary agency. Over the last fifty years it has diluted itself by taking on more and more esoteric issues. For most who work in the field it is now a spent force. As India entered the 1950s, everyone who cared tried to find new ways—through changes in the law—to save India's rapidly vanishing wildlife heritage. Within the pages of the BNHS journal were endless policy suggestions and recommendations. What a remarkable role the BNHS played for wildlife at so many critical moments of the twentieth century. But still the majority of people

THE N E H R U YEARS

175

fighting for India's wildlife were British. It would change—but slowly. The first bunch of Indians were stepping in. But till the 1950s the entire issue of saving wildlife was spearheaded by the British and we must acknowledge this fact. The 1950s started with a focus on the laws that governed wildlife. This had over the years become a really important issue. It was the only deterrent to the future depletion of wildlife. Again, it was the BNHS which played a unique role in steering through, what was then, a ground-breaking legislation. Another Indian, Humayun Abdulali, played a vital role in the first drafts of this bill. It was the Bombay Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act, 1951, which formed the basis of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. All the spadework for this Act was done in the early 1950s. In my opinion, this is the kind of work that created the awareness to prevent what was clearly the rapid extinction of India's wildlife. Hats off to those who worked so hard on it! People like Burton, Phythian-Adams, Morris, Stracey, and of course Abdulali can never be forgotten. There was also a forest officer, J. A. Singh, who played a critical role. What on earth would have been the state without such interventions and amendments? It is very clear from past records that post-independent India had a very active group of people fighting to keep alive the wildlife of those times. As the crisis deepened it was these people who came to the fore to write and fight. In the 1950s E.P. Gee took on the cause of wildlife as few before him had. He became one of the most active spokespersons for the wildlife and forests of India. In many ways the decade of the 1950s belongs to him and his writings: The Management of India's Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks By E.P. Gee, M.A., C.M.Z.S. (1952) Introduction The gradual extermination of wildlife in India has now reached a stage when it is of the utmost importance that the exact status of wildlife

176

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

sanctuaries should be reviewed, and the feasibility of creating national parks considered. The administration of these sanctuaries, formerly game reserves', has up to date been entirely in the hands of the Forest Department, under whose jurisdiction they naturally fall. Here it should be stressed that a strong, independent and separate department, adequately officered by men of sound training and a natural aptitude for the work in hand, is the best means of ensuring the really successful organisation and administration of India's wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. The possibility of some State, perhaps Bombay, succeeding in creating and financing a separate Wildlife Department should not altogether be ruled out. But while it would be eminently desirable to form a separate and independent 'Wildlife Department' to control the management of all sanctuaries containing valuable wildlife, shortage of funds and personnel as well as other considerations may render it necessary that, for the present at any rate, the State Forest Departments should continue to administer these sanctuaries. Strengthened by supplementary staff to perform the extra supervisory duties entailed by the preservation of wildlife, and with the necessary directives from the Central and State Governments, it should not be impossible for the State Forest Departments to perform effectively the task of wildlife conservation in addition to their other work. By this system the problems of dual control are eliminated, and the difficulties of a separate Wildlife Department working alongside the Forest department with inevitable duplications will not arise. It is sometimes difficult, however, to reconcile the functions of the Forest Department, which might seek to exploit the timber and other revenue-producing resources of the forests, with measures dictated by the necessity of preserving intact places of great faunal and scenic value. With this difficulty in view, a step forward has recently been made by the proposal to create wildlife advisory committees to advise state governments on measures to be adopted for the preservation and control of wildlife, and for the creation of national parks. A start has already been made at the Centre by the constitution of a Central Board for Wildlife, presumably to advise the Central and State Governments, to coordinate measures and to collect information and the like. Each state in turn will, it is hoped, form its own committee to

THE N E H R U YEARS

177

advise the state government, as at the Centre. As these committees will consist of non-officials as well as officials, the personnel would be properly representative of the people of the country and its best interests. It is to be hoped that each important state of the Indian Union will be able to create the post of'Wildlife Warden' or 'Wildlife Officer'. This person should be of a status not lower than that of a Divisional Forest Officer, and not under any DFO but responsible to the head of the Government department himself. It would be an advantage if he resided at the main sanctuary or national park of the state, and not at the city headquarters of the government. There is some uncertainty in certain circles as to whether the utilisation of forest and other resources is permissible within a sanctuary or national park. It will soon be the duty of Wildlife Advisory Committees in India to make decisions on this point, and to advise their governments on all matters pertaining to sanctuaries and national parks. With the object of resolving doubts, avoiding controversies and making the decisions of Advisory Committees easier, it is necessary to examine carefully the different aspects of sanctuary and park management and their possible good or bad effects on wildlife in relation to the country's interests. Measures for the preservation of wildlife in general and matters relating to finance are beyond the scope of this paper, and have therefore not been dealt with. The exploitable resources of India's existing or potential national parks include timber, fuel, thatch-building posts, cane, grazing and fodder; mineral resources; water for hydro-electric schemes; catching of wild animals such as elephant and rhinoceros; and fishing. There are in India two viewpoints on this question: one is that the sanctuaries and national parks should be entirely sacrosanct, and that no form of exploitation or interference would be justifiable under any circumstances. And the other viewpoint is that this source of revenue should be tapped and the bulk of it utilised for the upkeep of the park concerned. An analysis of the experience of other countries in this matter would not be out of place here, and might even be of some assistance to us in India in the conservation of our rich and varied wildlife and in the management of the places in which it is found.

178

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

National Parks in India Though there are a great many sanctuaries in India for the preservation of wildlife, and many more reserved forests in which shooting of game is controlled by law (officially, at least), the concept of national parks is still in its infancy. Nonetheless there is in India a clear distinction between a wildlife sanctuary and a national park. Sanctuaries are formed by state forest departments and proclaimed as such in Gazette Notifications, and can therefore be altered or abolished in a similar manner; though in actual practice substantial changes are not usually made in sanctuaries without the sanction of the Ministers concerned. National parks, on the other hand, are created by Acts of the state legislatures, and therefore possess the same degree of permanency as in other countries. Hence it should be mentioned that under the new Constitution of the Indian Union all powers regarding legislation for the protection of wild animals and birds are vested in the state governments. The Centre will only encourage, advise, assist, coordinate and so on. A National Park Policy for India The next year or two will see the foundation of a national park system in India, in which the management of national parks may be entirely in the hands of the forest department—advised, if not controlled, by Wildlife Advisory Committees consisting of both official and non-official members. It is essential, therefore, that the system should be founded on a sound basis, in which the interests of fauna and scenery, as far as is consistent with the interests of India as a whole, can be safeguarded for all time. Geological, historical, prehistorical, archaeological and other such national parks are not within the scope of this memorandum, which deals primarily with faunal and scenic areas, priority being given to those places which combine faunal with scenic interests. Those wildlife sanctuaries of India which have been tried out and proved to be of success should be made into national parks as soon as possible, in order to ensure that their status is legally secured for all time before it is too late. In the

THE N E H R U YEARS

179

management of sanctuaries and national parks, most activities fall under the headings of either exploitation or interference with nature. (1) Exploitation—It is advisable at the outset to define the word 'exploitation'. Exploitation can be used either in the bad sense of'revenuehunting' and 'squeezing' everything possible out of a forest into the exchequer of the state; or it can be used in the better sense of sound forest management as laid down by the principles of good sylviculture. The first-mentioned type of exploitation by 'revenue-hunting' should in all cases be rigidly avoided: such a practice would hardly ever be justified at all in any wildlife sanctuary or national park. But as a general concept sanctuaries and national parks should be left entirely unexploited and undisturbed, presuming that by this the fauna and flora will benefit. And it must be admitted at the outset that the comparatively small size of such places in India, which do not usually exceed a hundred or two hundred square miles in extent, is strongly in favour of their being left entirely unworked by the forest department. In many cases the forest operations could be done elsewhere in neighbouring forests. The 23 square mile Mudumalai wildlife sanctuary in Madras state, where exploitation of timber is still being done, is a case of a beautiful though small potential national park which should be exempt from exploitation, and if possible enlarged. The arguments against exploitation of forest produce by the forest department in sanctuaries and national parks are (a) that the strict international concept of sanctity is violated, (b) that the value of the original flora and fauna in their original state is lost to biologists, (c) that the wildlife is disturbed and (d) that poaching is done by contractors and their labourers. It has often been found in India, however, that if a portion of forest is sealed off by the forest department as a sanctuary and left entirely 'undisturbed', it soon becomes a paradise for poachers who, in the absence of a strong and costly protection staff, can carry on their profitable destructive illegalities with complete impunity. It can be argued that the conditions peculiar to India may not, as in the case of Uttar Pradesh, permit of an inflexible adherence to the idealistic definitions of faunal national parks in the USA and Africa as large areas to be kept entirely undisturbed by man, under the control of a separate

180

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

wildlife department. Some of India's sanctuaries and national parks contain valuable timber forests as are not normally found in America and Africa, and their revenues would be indispensable to the states in which they are situated. If the extraction of this timber were to be done by selective felling under rigid control and under a carefully prepared working plan, with suitable permanent preservation plots here and there where wild animals could retreat into perfect seclusion if they so desired, and with due regard to the scenery of the area, it is theoretically feasible that such a policy might not be detrimental to the wildlife. The actual disturbance to wildlife in such places is not as great as imagined: the entry of human beings into forests for firewood and timber is a recognised part of the ecological situation of most forests. R.W. Burton has described how he has met tiger, panther and bear in blocks where contractors were working, and how a tigress walked through the ashes of his campfire. F.W. Champion has also stated that deer would browse at night on the foliage of freshly felled trees, and how tiger roamed at night the roads which were full of human activity in daylight. In any case such a policy of controlled and restricted exploitation throughout a national park would detract greatly from its intrinsic value as a national park, especially from the scientific point of view. There can be little doubt that in such cases a preferable plan would be either to eliminate exploitation altogether in the park; or else—if the revenue has in previous years been realised and is vital to the state—to divide the park and thus maintain sanctity in at least one portion, with the exploited portion remaining as a buffer or intermediate zone of reserved forest closed to all shooting, with the wildlife control in the hands of the park authorities. It is evident that each case must be carefully studied on its own merits by the Advisory Committee, and decided accordingly. In the case of any exploitation of forest produce already in practice in a sanctuary of India, it would be only reasonable to expect that at least a part of the revenue thus realised should be made available for the development and protection of the sanctuary. A limited extraction of timber, thatch and such forest produce would, of course, be permissible for meeting the actual needs of the sanctuary

THE N E H R U YEARS

181

or national park, should the occasion arise. This would be a matter for the Advisory Committee or park authority to decide. Another form of exploitation in sanctuaries in India is the issuing of permits to graziers for grazing of domestic cattle. It is generally agreed that such intrusion by domestic cattle is most undesirable. Not only is it most detrimental to the grazing potential of the sanctuary, but also it is a means by which disease is spread with devastating effect on wild animals. It should, therefore, be avoided wherever humanly possible; and in any case compulsory prophylactic inoculations should be done among the cattle in the vicinity of a sanctuary or park. It should also be made compulsory for all owners of cattle living in the locality of a park to report any outbreak of cattle disease immediately to the appropriate authority. (2) Interference with Nature—In addition to the utilisation of sanctuary resources for revenue, another form of violation of the strict concept of 'undisturbed nature' is intervention, or interference with nature. This may often be expedient, or even necessary. One of these acts of interference with nature is the deliberate burning off of grass and reeds in order to improve the grazing for ungulates and visibility for visitors. This is very often advisable and any temporary disturbance to wildlife is probably offset by the resultant advantage of the growth of young shoots of grass, which are extremely palatable to hoofed animals. Rhino, buffalo and deer in the Kaziranga Wildlife Sanctuary are to be found in burnt off patches almost immediately after the burning, and seem to find even the ashes of some edible value. It is reported that the cessation of burning in the Jaldapara Game Sanctuary of Bengal has resulted in an overabundance of undesirable trees, such as khair, sidha, simul and others, out of place in such a sanctuary. A point to be carefully borne in mind is that where some form of human activity, such as the burning off of grass every year over a period of years, has brought about an ecological situation, the removal of that interference would be liable to cause a change in the general situation which might upset the ecological equilibrium of the place, with possible adverse effects on the wildlife. In most parts of India the reserved forests contain 'Forest villages' (as in Assam), or 'Settlements' of aborigines and 'Revenue Enclosures' (as in

182

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

South India). These usually provide free labour to the forest department in return for the land they occupy; and while the advantages of this scheme for forestry work are obvious, the disadvantages are equally apparent in those particular places where fauna is of importance. It is reported that in the Chamarajnagar wildlife sanctuary of Mysore, for example, the presence of settlers in possession of guns in the sanctuary has resulted in the depletion of the deer. Only in very rare cases could their existence be justified in a wildlife sanctuary or national park. With regard to the damming of large rivers for hydroelectric and irrigation schemes, this may be deemed unavoidable in the overriding interests of the State. Although there would be considerable disturbance, though not necessarily destruction, of wildlife during the construction of the dam and other works, the ultimate result need not be disadvantageous to the wildlife or detracting from the scenery—as has been proved in the case of the Periyar wildlife sanctuary of Travancore. Moreover the acquisition of the roads, buildings and the like would be an asset to the park. If the water of the Manas river in the North Kamrup Wildlife sanctuary of Assam were ever to be impounded, the resultant lake in the Bhutan Hills could be made to fit into the general scheme of a park with satisfying results—both scenic and faunal. It may also be necessary to interfere in the natural course of events in the domestic affairs of wildlife. For should any particular animal or bird in a sanctuary multiply to undesirable numbers, its increase might have to be checked in the interest of the wildlife as a whole. Where the 'balance of nature' has been upset by man, it can be justifiably corrected by man. In the Periyar Wildlife Sanctuary of Travancore, the number of sambar has declined due to the increase of wild dogs. These pests must be ruthlessly destroyed. Crocodiles in some places need to be kept under control. This form of control has been found necessary in other countries: for example in the Nairobi National Park 300 hyaenas recently had to be destroyed. Conversely it may become desirable to introduce certain animals and birds into a sanctuary or national park. It is strongly recommended that in no case should a 'foreign' species be introduced into India's wildlife sanctuaries. The introduction some years ago of zebra into the Periyar Wildlife Sanctuary was a mistake—fortunately none of them survives

THE N E H R U YEARS

183

today. There could be no objection, however, to the reintroduction of species which formerly existed in an area. For example, Indian cheetah, Indian wild ass, Indian lion, brow-antlered deer and others could most advantageously be reintroduced where they have now become extinct. Conclusion I have tried to represent factually and realistically the main facts and problems confronting the nature conservationists in India today. In India, in a forest area, it is essential that one and the same department should control both the wildlife and the forests in which it lives. Provided that the Forest department of India, both at the Centre and in the States, attain full understanding of and sympathy with wildlife, and pay due attention to the advice of naturalists and others, there is no reason why this method of control should not succeed. F.W. Champion has observed: 'There is no sound reason why good forestry and wildlife conservation should not work perfectly satisfactorily together provided there is a reasonable amount of give and take on both sides... . There is no doubt that the interests of good forestry and fauna conservation sometimes do tend to clash. This is largely because there is only too often a lack of coordination between the two.' In this connection, the broad principle advocated by Keith Caldwell should be accepted, namely that in national parks, when development seriously conflicts with wildlife, the interests of wildlife should have precedence. It is not possible, therefore, to arrive easily at any detailed cut-anddried conclusions as to the exact lines on which the administration and management of sanctuaries and national parks in India can be carried out. In all cases, however, extremist views are to be avoided. A few basic generalisations can, at the same time, be made; and these might form a broad foundation on which Central and State polices might be based in India. In the first place, all Advisory Boards and Committees should be widely representative of the public as well as of officials, and should contain at least some persons with expert knowledge of the subject. Officers in charge of sanctuaries or national parks should be specially selected for these appointments. And as the task of administering India's

184

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

sanctuaries and national parks will probably fall on the shoulders of the forest departments, the study of wildlife problems and wildlife ecology should immediately be included in the curricula of forest training schools. A great deal of publicity and propaganda needs to be done in India in order to bring about a speedy realisation of the need for nature conservation, and in order to ensure the successful enforcement of laws protecting sanctuaries, national parks and the wildlife they contain. In this respect it should be made clear that wildlife includes flora as well as fauna, since measures to protect forests and to prevent soil erosion and other evils are more likely to find favour with the public at the present time. Actual 'revenue-hunting' should be rigidly ruled out where any sanctuaries or national parks are concerned. Carefully planned and restricted forest operations, improvements and 'interferences with nature' should be permitted when essential, or when known to be beneficial to the sanctuary or national park and its wildlife. Whenever possible, a national park or wildlife sanctuary should be separated from areas of human occupation by buffer zones, or intermediate zones, of a suitable width, in order to allow animal drift without repercussions on their numbers. In all cases, therefore, when a problem arises as to whether some specific form of activity or intervention can be allowed, the criterion should be: Will the fauna and flora, and the sanctuary or park itself, benefit from this action in the long run? Left strictly alone, a sanctuary or national park may deteriorate: it must be carefully watched and actively managed by an efficient and knowledgeable controlling authority. India should not entirely overlook the advantages of placing any important preservation area under the control of an independent and permanent Trust, secure from temporary, political and other changing influences. This was advocated in the proceedings of the International Convention held in London in 1933. The nomination of the members of such a Trust, and of all Wildlife Advisory Committees and of National Park Advisory or Controlling Committees, should not be entirely in the hands of Governors and Ministers, but also in the hands of wellestablished societies, universities and such bodies. The object, of course,

THE N E H R U YEARS

185

is to appoint persons of eminence, independence, experience, understanding and integrity to such positions. The 'balance of nature', especially the ups and downs of mammal and bird populations, must be accurately assessed, with the full realisation that nature is never static but subject to constant change. The ecologies of the plants, mammals and birds in each wildlife sanctuary or national park all need to be intelligently studied: both their interrelationships among themselves, and the effects on them of all the important factors in their environment. It is only on the result of the study of the biological requirements of species, and of the biotic communities to be preserved, that controls and adjustments in the ecological situation of a place can safely be made by human agency for the benefit of humans, without detriment to the wildlife. A matter of policy should in all cases be carefully and objectively examined by the members of a wildlife advisory committee. Expert opinion, whenever necessary, should be sought from biologists, ecologists, veterinary research officers and such persons, before any new policy is determined or disputable action taken. The ultimate well-being of the sanctuary or national park and its wildlife should always be the foremost consideration. On all occasions when there is any doubt as to whether a sanctuary or national park and its wildlife will benefit from any specific action, the general principles of 'unspoilt nature' and 'undisturbed ecological equilibrium' may be followed. In the discharge of their duties great care needs to be exercised by the members of advisory committees or controlling authorities, as these persons are responsible to future generations as the Trustees of India's valuable wildlife.' Journal ofBombay Natural History Society, Vol. 51 (1952), pp. 1-17.

Gee was a tea planter from Assam. His area of special expertise was the eastern region of India. His knowledge of wildlife was encyclopaedic and he had a clear view of the solutions ahead. I am certain he was also a diplomat, since by 1952 he was put on a series of committees for determining policies on wildlife issues. We will continue to look at his writings since the attention to detail was remarkable, and a lesson for all of us today who are involved

186

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

in conservation. Let us also look at the contributions by other contemporaries: Jungle Memories By Major (Lt. Col.) E.G. Phythian-Adams, O.B.E., F.Z.S., I .A. (Retd.) Conservation Before bringing these Memories to a close, it may be worthwhile to look back and consider the changes in sporting ethics during the past 50 years, and their resultant effect on wildlife. When I landed in India the standard of sportsmanship was very high indeed, and approximately very nearly to what the Greek writer Arrian wrote 1800 years ago regarding the people of Britain, who he said 'hunt for the beauty of the sport, and consider the killing of the prey to be of minor importance'. Gone, it seemed for ever, were the days of the butchers of the 70s and 80s of last century, whose bloody exploits are so unblushingly detailed in certain old shikar books. The game laws too had been tightened up and were rigidly enforced. In fact it seemed reasonable to assume, without undue complacency, that the future of wildlife in India was secure for many years to come. Then came the two World Wars and their aftermath—the disappearance of many who could have passed on the traditions they had inherited, and a general disrespect for law and order. The increasing use of motor cars too, enabled an ever-increasing number to indulge in a new form of shikar, and to slaughter animals with a minimum of exertion or risk, subordinating all ideas of sportsmanship to the desire to kill. With India's attainment of independence, matters went from bad to worse. There was undoubtedly a widespread belief (which persists even today) that the game laws in force till then were introduced by alien rulers to serve their own ends, and might now be safely disregarded. Their real purpose, to conserve wildlife, was, and still is, completely ignored. Gun clubs were formed in many places, ostensibly for crop protection, but mostly for the high profit to be derived from the sale of meat. With few exceptions everyone possessing a firearm uses it for the indiscriminate destruction of game, regardless of sex or season. Persons

THE N E H R U YEARS

187

without the least experience of shikar fire with buckshot at all kinds of animals, of which many in consequence escape to die a lingering death. If a dangerous animal is not killed on the spot, no attempt is made to follow it up, with the result that it becomes a source of danger to some unfortunate villager. The game laws are not adequately enforced, since forest subordinates are in many cases afraid to report poachers lest their families suffer reprisals, or else the social status of the offender ensures his immunity. These things are matters of common knowledge, and it is no exaggeration to say that if the slaughter taking place all over the country continues at the present rate, game animals in India will soon become practically extinct in all but most inaccessible areas. Unfortunately it is only too obvious that in this country to date, in spite of much propaganda, the real object of conservation is very far from being understood. Wildlife is a very real national asset, and no one can object to all reasonable steps being taken for its preservation. Journal ofBombay Natural History Society, Vol. 50, No. 3 (April 1952), pp. 466-8.

It was in December 1952 that the first resolutions of the Central Board of Wildlife were adopted. 1 Let us glance at what was happening to the eastern region of India in the early 1950s. E.P. Gee takes us on our journey. Wildlife Preservation in India Annual Report for 1953 on The Eastern Region By E.P. GEE, M.A., C.M.Z.S., Honorary Regional Secretary, Indian Board for Wildlife The Eastern Region During the year 1953 the Eastern Region under the Indian Board for Wildlife comprised the following States: Assam, Bengal, Bihar, Manipur, Orissa and Tripura. 1. See Appendix II.

188

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The North East Frontier Agency, an area containing rich and varied wildlife and some of the finest mountain and river scenery in India, is not included in this Region. It is to be hoped that in the near future the N.E.F.A. will be in a position either to form its own Wildlife Board or to send representatives to the Assam Wildlife Board and thus become coordinated with Assam in the matter of wildlife preservation. Similarly, Bhutan is adjacent to Bengal and Assam and has mutual problems concerning wildlife preservation; and it would be in the interests both of India and Bhutan if the latter country could be closely associated with India in this respect. The same kind of problems exist on the borders of Bihar and Nepal, and it would also be in the interests of both these States if concerted action could be taken to preserve wildlife. Wildlife Legislation 1. The Effectiveness of Existing Legislation There are two alternatives now: one is to revive the old legislation and strictly enforce it, and the other is to make new and up-to-date legislation. I am in favour of the latter course, provided it is not too elaborate or difficult to enforce. I consider the Bombay Act of 1951 an excellent piece of legislation for the preservation of wildlife, but can it be enforced? According to this Bombay Act, if a man shoots a bulbul, say, in his own vegetable garden he is liable to prosecution. There is no chance of such intricate legislation being properly enforced. I feel that a simplified and up to date form of the Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act of 1912 might be the answer. A rationalised and simplified schedule of close seasons and protected animals and birds, easy of enforcement, is desirable. I also recommend that first things be done first; that is pay full attention to the sanctuaries first and make them proof against poaching and properly guarded; then pay attention to the reserved forests and make them proof against poaching and all illicit practices; and then after these two items have been fully dealt with turn attention to the unclassed forests, wastelands, private lands, and so on.

T H E N E H R U YEARS

189

Under the present state of legislation, detection of offenders is difficult and charges hard to substantiate. And when a case is successfully brought and proved, the magistrate imposes an absurdly lenient fine—Rs 60, say, for a hog deer killed and valued at Rs 120 for its meat, or even for a sambar valued at Rs 400. These fines were probably fixed some 50 years ago, and since then the value of money has changed, but not the fines. The forest department, which has control of all sanctuaries and reserved forests, can 'compound' a case for up to Rs 50 only. This 'fine' was also fixed some 50 years ago, and by the present value of money should be raised to Rs 200. If a Divisional Forest Officer could compound cases of offence against the Forest Regulations with a fine of Rs 200 and also possibly with a liability of the offender to pay the amount of damage done (as is sometimes done in Bengal—a good idea), the immediate protection given to wildlife would be very great indeed. In fact I feel certain that the first step in any proposed legislation of any kind should be the revision and improvement of the State's Forest Regulations in so far as they apply to wildlife preservation. Holders of 'crop protection' guns are well known as responsible for extermination of much wildlife. Since the handing in of these guns after the crops have been reaped presents a great administrative problem, it would perhaps be a better idea if the use of these guns is restricted to the area of crop-producing land actually belonging to the possessor of the gun, and if he wishes to shoot elsewhere he must obtain an extra licence. Licence fees for possession of guns and for shooting with them should be increased—these again are in many cases the same as they were 50 years ago when the value of money was much greater than now. 2. New Legislation Passed or Contemplated. (1) Assam—The draft Assam Rhinoceros Preservation Bill was scrutinised by the Assam Wildlife Board, and modified in places where considered necessary. An Assam National Parks Bill has been drafted and will soon be placed before the Wildlife Board for approval. Subcommittees have made proposals for the Rules, etc., of the State Wildlife Board, and for the revision of the Assam Forest Regulation. (2) Bengal—Proposals are being put up to Government for the management of the Jaldapara Sanctuary as a national park. The

190

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Conservator General of Forests is of the opinion that Forest Officers should be invested with the powers of a police officer to demand the production of a licence and of a gun for examination. The Government has renewed the leases to the Associations of the Game Federation of Bengal. (3) Bihar—Measures contemplated are: Rationalisation of the 'Close' season for all kinds of birds and animals; the enactment of a special law applicable only to the State-owned Forests which will provide for deterrent penalties, including confiscation of firearms and cancellation of licences of habitual offenders, and the creation of a national park, or in the alternative of a large sanctuary covering about 200-300 sq. miles in area. General It is generally agreed, particularly in the Eastern Region of India, that a separate wildlife organisation is not feasible, and that wildlife preservation is best taken care of by the Forest Department under whose charge most of the wildlife already falls. To counteract the possibility that the Minister of Forests and the officials of the forest department may not always act in a way best calculated to serve the interests of wildlife, it has been accepted that each state should have a wildlife board whose main function will be to advise the forest department on all matters affecting wildlife. Obviously these boards must contain a strong, influential and knowledgeable element of non-officials, who should fully represent all important sections of public opinion and should contain among their number some experts in the field of nature conservation, natural history and sport. In order that the forest department, advised by the wildlife board, may efficiently carry out its duties, it is essential that the forest regulations should be revised and brought up to date. Journal ofBombay Natural History Society, Vol. 53, Nos. 2 & 3 (1954), pp. 233, 237-9.

Gee was an expert on the eastern region of the country. He played a critical role in ensuring that places like Manas and

THE N E H R U YEARS

191

Kaziranga survived the pressures of those times. The efforts of people like Gee must have been enormous just to suggest policy and then make sure it was delivered with field action. Large portions of Assam's fertile grasslands were rapidly being converted into agricultural fields, and battling to save them in the 1950s must have been a nightmare. By the end of the century the eastern region would end up getting completely hammered. Only the protected areas would remain alive. And thank God that the battles for protected areas were fought and won in the 1940s and 1950s. The Central Board of Wildlife, which later became known as the Indian Board of Wildlife, had just been set up and in the enthusiasm that the Board would deliver on its promises, many put pen to paper and assessed the general state of affairs across India. Here is one from Y.R. Ghorpade on the southern region: Wildlife Preservation in India Annual Report for 1953 on the Southern Region By Y.R. Ghorpade Regional Secretary Wildlife in the Region The Great Indian Bustard, the Hunting Leopard, the Nilgiri Tahr and the Nilgiri Black Langur, and perhaps the Malabar Squirrel, are good examples of species more or less threatened with extinction; in some of these the threat has gone a long way towards fulfilment. However, I think that certain other animals, not so patently threatened, are no less in need of protection. It is wise to act on the basis that prevention is better than cure in the matter of wildlife conservation, especially as we are not now in a position to fully realise or completely control the factors that lead to the decline and disappearance of our fauna. Hence, I would certainly include such animals as the Four-horned Antelope, the Chinkara, and the Blackbuck in any list of beasts specially in need of protection in the Southern Region.

192

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Blackbuck are still to be found in certain parts of the Southern region, especially in the black cotton soil tracts near theTungabhadra Dam area, in and around the Hyderabad boundary. Some fifteen years ago, I distinctly remember counting no less than a hundred buck in a single spot in this area, not to mention the innumerable does in the herds. A sight such as that is an impossibility today in that very place, which used to be so replete with these most graceful and purely Indian antelope. Local tribes, who are professional netters of buck for food and sale of meat and skins, and shooting from cars by both licensed and unlicensed guns, have contributed to the great decline of the Blackbuck of this area. It is possible to kill off these buck from an area by indiscriminate shooting; it has happened before. The decline of these buck and other beasts of open country in places where the Hunting Leopard was once not uncommon is the chief reason for the disappearance of the latter. One still hopes for the survival of stray specimens of the Hunting Leopard in the region—one was reported to have been seen in the Chittoor district recently. Some villagers in the Koppbal district of Hyderabad, near the village of Mukumpi, talk of a rare animal which they call the Shivanga or Shivungi, which they claim to have seen sitting on the boulders of the rocky terrain. I have good reason to believe that Shivanga and Shivungi are the Kanarese names of the Hunting Leopard and, although I have not been able to see a Shivanga in this locality for all my efforts, I think there is every chance of a few specimens surviving here. Should it be possible to restore a sufficient tract in this area to near the natural conditions of the past, and to effectively prevent the killing of a hunting leopard by any means, the species might be restored here. Surely it is worth taking considerable pains to restore the hunting leopard to India, if necessary by reintroductions after the terrain has been suitably prepared. The Great Indian Bustard should also be pretty high in the list of protected animals and birds. I have seen quite a few of them in the black cotton soil areas in the extreme south of Hyderabad, already referred to in connection with blackbuck. They are found wherever there are expanses of flat black cotton soil. I have been seeing them for the last so many years in the blackbuck country in the southernmost parts of Hyderabad. The setting up of parks and sanctuaries envisaged by the Wildlife Board

THE N E H R U YEARS

193

is good, but not until many square miles of open country are set apart in many places all over South India, exclusively for the animals of the flat open country, can anyone really hope to preserve our wildlife—especially the Great Indian Bustard, the Blackbuck and the Hunting Leopard. Merely to declare certain animals and birds as protected by law is not a sufficient safeguard against their destruction, apart from the administrative difficulties of enforcing protection. For, apart from the environmental conditions necessary for them to thrive, there are so may other animals which enter into their lives, and which are therefore also necessary, directly or indirectly, for them to live in a healthy state. Therefore, the most effective way of giving protection to animals is to see to it that the entire area which they inhabit, or a good portion of it, is as little disturbed or interfered with as possible. Given protection from disturbance and interference, Nature will look after itself better than we can ever hope to do, with all our meticulous laws and by-laws. This is, in the ultimate analysis, a far more effective measure than merely declaring a few rare or diminishing species as protected, without bothering sufficiently to ensure protection from all other kinds of interference for the whole area or a big chunk of it, in which these species are to be found. Some twenty-five years ago there is evidence of H.H. the Maharaja Catrapatti of Kolhapur having sent his men to capture a few Hunting Leopards from this area for his sporting purposes in Kolhapur. These cheetahs were caught, tamed and trained to catch blackbuck. Obviously there must have been quite a few of these animals then. As regards the Great Indian Bustard I have known people who once upon a time have seen them in droves of thirty and forty. I have been a witness to the gradual decline in the numbers of bustards through the years. One can give a large number of reasons for this. But the main reason is of course the increasing disturbance of wildlife in this area by the industrial and other activities of our ever-increasing population which has, directly and indirectly, interfered in a thousand and one ways with the normal activities of the animals. To take only one example, the recent Tungabhadra Project near Hospet caused a noticeable reduction in the game in Koppbal. The number of people wanting to shoot, with and without licence, increased. Many enthusiasts from the Project area started

194

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

disturbing game by endless night drives with searchlights. A local shikari at Mukumpi village, a few miles from Hospet in Koppbal, told me that within the last few months one amateur shikari from the Tungabhadra Project had fired at no less than fifteen panthers in addition to several other animals, which he shot and wounded during night drives. This is only to illustrate the amount of disturbance one single industrial project can cause to the game. This does not of course mean that such projects must not be started, but it does mean that stricter methods of protecting wildlife must be evoked, to cope with the encroachment of the noise and bustle of civilisation into the peace of the wilderness. Apart from indiscriminate shooting and slaughter for meat or money, deprivation of territory by the utterly haphazard and needlessly extensive methods for augmenting transport and agriculture, practised by our alarmingly increasing population, can be, and should be, regulated in such areas, if not completely stopped. Four different but closely linked concepts are involved in this last statement. That is, interference with the environment by (i) interfering with the flora by forestry work or wood-cutting, or the introduction of new plants intentionally or unintentionally, (ii) by shooting or otherwise killing or persecuting a part of the fauna, (iii) by disturbing the animals and so interfering with their normal activity—a very potent cause—and (iv) loss of territory by needlessly extensive agriculture and transport practices. Is it just fortuitous that the game animals are plentiful in Bandipur and not in Mudumalai? Measures Taken, and Effectiveness of Current Protective Legislation In accordance with the suggestion of the Executive Committee of the Central Wildlife Board to the State Governments to set up State Wildlife Boards and to promulgate wildlife protection laws on the lines of the Bombay law, Mysore and Hyderabad have already set up Wildlife Boards. I had suggested to all the State Governments in the Southern Region, in my letter dated 12th June 1953, to consider taking certain urgent measures, such as prohibiting sale of wildlife, netting of wild birds and animals, strictly observing close seasons, discouraging or prohibiting the use of crop protection weapons for purposes of hunting in the forests and lands at the disposal of Government, etc., until more comprehensive measures

THE N E H R U YEARS

195

were taken after the recommendations of the State Wildlife Boards. I had also requested all the Chief Conservators of Forests in my region, and also non-officials who were keenly interested in wildlife protection, to give their view on the effectiveness of existing legislation and the measures that should be taken to effectively protect wildlife. The consensus of opinion was that it is 'not so much the nature of the legislation as the effective implementation of it' which is the crux of the problem. If the existing game laws were enforced properly they would be adequate to protect game. But the utter inefficiency in enforcing game laws cannot be exaggerated or overemphasised. The callous indifference and appalling apathy of forest guards who are supposed to be the guardians of the forest is simply staggering. I am convinced of this. To give an example, the sambar in Sandur (S. India) till a few years ago before the state was merged, could be, and was, protected effectively with the same legislation that exists today. One could see forty to fifty sambar in single drive of seven to eight miles. As a result, tiger started coming into Sandur where they were never known to exist before. Both tiger and sambar increased faster than expectations. But suddenly within the last few years there has been a tragic extermination of the sambar. Poaching and nocturnal sambar hunts with packs of dogs have been responsible for this. The foresters now just do not seem to be interested in stopping it. Game is openly sold for money. The same fate befell the partridges. Passepardis caught them by the hundreds and sold them with impunity. I have seen with my own eyes the disappearance of game in Sandur which I had protected and fostered for the last twenty years. I decided to give this example of the Sandur sambar because I can personally vouch for its veracity, and because it illustrates vividly the amount of damage indifferent implementation of game laws can do to game in a short time. It is amazing how fast game can be destroyed. And there is only one explanation to it in the above case—non-enforcement of existing laws. In short, present laws do not encourage wildlife. They only prohibit, and they are often unknown and unimplemented. Issue of game and gun licences in the name of crop protection is another potent cause. Practically all the keen sportsmen I wrote to mentioned this as a grave threat to wildlife. It was suggested by the Nilgiri Association that gun permits for crop protection should be withdrawn

196

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

when the crops are garnered. Better still crackers or dummy cartridges should be used for scaring away game from fields. Small game and antelopes require protection from wandering tribes of professional trappers such as the 'Hacci Pacci Avaru' or Passepardis who are responsible for the small game being on the verge of extinction. It was suggested at the Mysore Wildlife Board that these people in Mysore state be found alternative employment by giving them lands. There were, however, so many applications, including those from outside Mysore, that the matter had to be kept in abeyance. These passepardis are keen to take agriculture, as they say small game is now so reduced that they are put to great hardships and sometimes starvation. First of all, a thorough census must be made of these tribes whose livelihood involves the destruction of small game. Another piece of information which is worth noting is that all people in Coorg enjoy a free licence and a large majority of them own guns. Clearly this could not be very conducive to the protection of game in Coorg. Free licences ought to be cancelled and licences be issued only to bona fide sportsmen. There are quite a few keen sportsmen in Coorg, as elsewhere, who should be made Honorary Game Wardens. This will have a salutary effect on poaching which is going on there, as everywhere else. The Honorary Secretary of the Peermade Game Association in reply to inquiries made by me writes as follows: (I am quoting from his letter as it brings out certain of the administrative problems of maintaining a game sanctuary. A game sanctuary only becomes a home for poachers if it is not properly supervised.) 'The Periyar Game Sanctuary in TravancoreCochin State is about 300 sq. miles in area. There are no separate laws or rules in respect of the sanctuary except the laws covered by the State Forests Act. The Staff now working under the Game Department is quite inadequate to effectively protect the sanctuary and for preservation work. The staff consists of the D.F.O.-cum-Game Warden, Kottayam, Assistant Game Warden (also the Secretary of the Peermade Game Association), one Game Range Officer, two foresters and thirteen guards. Of these, one forester and a few guards are posted for protection work outside the sanctuary. The amenities such as transport facilities, housing conveniences, etc., provided for the subordinate staff are very poor. They

THE N E H R U YEARS

197

have also to be provided with necessary arms and ammunition. The existing paths in the sanctuary are very limited. The opening of a few more paths through the sanctuary will help better patrol work and supervision of the area. For the Periyar Sanctuary, the D.F.O., Kottayam, is also the Game Warden, and his headquarters is at Kottayam, far away from the game area. A separate Game Warden, as was the case when the sanctuary started, with headquarters in the game area, who could concentrate all his attention on wildlife preservation, must be appointed. With dual duty it will not be possible to exercise effective control and personal supervision over the area . . . . The more lowly paid members of the forest staff should be encouraged by a system of rewards, as for instance, a proportion of fines levied . . . . Fines and penalties are not sufficiently deterrent . . . . Officials charged with the enforcement of game laws are frequently indifferent. The Nilgiri Game Association feels that 'existing legislation is not sufficient to stop poaching. The present maximum fine of Rs 50 is totally inadequate. It might be increased to Rs 500 with the alternative of 6 months' rigorous imprisonment and thus brought into line with penalties for breaches of Nilgiri Fishing Rules. In addition, confiscation of weapons and/or motor cars is most desirable. Failure to report the wounding of dangerous animals should be punishable with a mandatory sentence of 6 months' imprisonment as is the case under the Kenya Game Rules.' As regards the Mudumalai Sanctuary, I believe that there is a proposal to increase its area by attaching the Wynad area. The Wynad area, I am told, is full of private holdings and Estates, and hence the advisability and wisdom of adding Wynad to the Mudumalai Sanctuary should be carefully examined. Lastly, I must mention that widespread publicity to remove public apathy towards the cause of wildlife preservation is more important than one imagines. Sandur December 31, 1953 Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 53 (1955), pp. 103-09.

I find the writings of the first Indians in wildlife conservation fascinating. Ghorpade was a strong believer in the inviolate

198

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

area where there was little disturbance. Everyone talked of punishments and enforcement of the law because like today, it must have been a period when most did not care and endless laws were broken. The ecology of the countryside was changing rapidly as the new catchword of development ploughed across the country. Agriculture had become a priority and large areas of grasslands were soon lost to agriculture. Let us look at what was happening in western India. Again, there was another Indian whose immense knowledge of that region, and especially its birds, was a great asset in their protection and this in the fragile wilderness of western India. This is what Dharmakumarsinhji wrote: Wildlife Preservation in India Annual Report for 1953 on the Western Region By K.S. Dharmakumarsinhji Vice-Chairman, Indian Board for Wildlife and Hon. Regional Secretary A brief summary of the wildlife situation within my region is necessary. The position of wildlife exclusive of game species appears to be satisfactory. Big game species on the whole, are on the decrease, and certain species such as Lion, Blackbuck, Chinkara, Swamp Deer, and perhaps Sambar with their respective habitats require special protection. The Crocodiles (two species—Palustris and Gavialis gangeticus) are definitely diminishing in numbers and therefore need discreet protection. Small game in general is not yet seriously affected: in some States it is on the increase. But the Great Indian Bustard (Choriotis nigriceps) and Junglefowls (red and grey) require careful preservation. The formation of State Wildlife Advisory Boards has had a beneficial effect on the general public and State Governments all over, and has done much to save the wildlife in Western India. The Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Acts in the States of Bombay and Saurashtra are certainly welcome and there is a growing sympathy by the people towards the preservation of wildlife in the two States. However, 'Touring Wildlife

THE N E H R U YEARS

199

Committees' are essential to estimate and evaluate wildlife populations 'on the spot'. Schemes for National Parks are rapidly gaining strength. 'Protected Areas' for wildlife are being established. More attention is being given to Sanctuaries. Fish life during drought years have suffered heavily in some States, but fish depletion in the larger rivers has not taken place. The freshwater fish industry needs special attention. This report has been prepared from information received from various States, and includes a rapid survey of the Gir Forest in Saurashtra, the home of the Indian Lion. The Divisional Forest Officer's report from Jamnagar states that game species are increasing in the Gir Forest and Barda Hilla and decreasing in other parts of Saurashtra. My rapid survey of wildlife of the Gir forest between 1st April and 15th April, failed to reveal game in abundance, while actually some species were found in small numbers and are obviously reduced. The Indian lion is one of the most important animal species in Asia today, the preservation of which has drawn the attention of the International Union for the Protection of Nature. My report of 1949 to the Union referred to this problem. The Asiatic Lion (Panthera leopersica) formerly ranged throughout the Middle East and northern India. Today, it is restricted to the Gir forest in Sauratra and Bombay (Amreli district— formerly Baroda territory). The Saurashtra Government has given protection to the animal by order Notification No. DP/ F/ 1118-7/157 dated 25th July 1953 and by Section 16 of the Saurashtra Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act, 1952; and the Bombay state has given the lion complete protection. The lion census made by Mr. M.A. WynterBlyth in 1950 on behalf of the Saurashtra government revealed between 219 to 227 lions (adult and young inclusive) with a maximum of 250 lions in the whole of Gir forest. The killing of lions is carefully controlled by the Rajpramukh of Saurashtra and the limit of four lions to be shot per annum has been laid down as a general policy. This seems to be reasonable in spite of the fact that lions may increase rapidly if given proper protection. The State Wildlife Board, at its second meeting recommended 3 lions and 3 lionesses to be shot as maximum for the whole year. However, lions have been ordered to be destroyed for cattle

200

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

lifting from time to time and it is unfortunate that a number have been thus killed. Moreover, an accurate record of lions destroyed or found dead has not been kept by the forest department. It appears that a good number of lions have been destroyed in a clandestine manner. Actually, I feel that on no account should lions be killed for cattle lifting since most lions in the Gir forest, at one time or another, feed upon cattle owing to the density of livestock within the Forest. It is deplorable that records of game killed in the Gir forest, as well as in areas in some other states, have not been accurately maintained, and in a few are even completely wanting. My recent survey of the Gir forest revealed that game had been indiscriminately shot, especially Cheetal, Wild Boar, and Sambar, while Chousingha and Nilgai were holding their own in fair numbers, though not in abundance. It is unfortunate that the wildlife of the Gir area has not had the rigid protection as made known officially in spite of the importance of the lion. The Grey Hornbill (Tockus hirostris) appears now to be extinct. The Green Pigeon (Crocopus phoenicopterus) may have the same fate due to carelessness if not well protected, for the feathers are sought for the same medicinal purpose as those of the Grey Hornbill. During my rapid survey, firing was heard within the Gir forest and animal life was seen to flee at the approach of motor vehicles. This behaviour of game species discloses indiscriminate shooting from motor vehicles in contravention of Section 17 of the Saurashtra Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act, 1952. The State Government has appointed a Wildlife Officer for the Gir with a small staff. This so-called Wildlife department enjoys a reputation of supplying shikar to some sportsmen only. The present set-up is wholly unsatisfactory since poaching is rampant, mostly by forest contractors and their workmen. The Forest Department is ignorant of how to manage wildlife in the Gir. The sooner a National Park is formed in the Gir, the better it will be in the interest of the lion. The lion's natural food is slowly decreasing, and unless firm steps are taken to prevent the killing of game species which supply its food a crisis is inevitable. The State Government should keep a proper record of the lions and game killed or found dead, and this information should be passed on to the Regional Secretary for Wildlife regularly every month.

T H E N E H R U YEARS

201

The present question of controlling the maldharies—livestock owners—in the Gir forest is under the consideration of the Saurashtra government. Grassland Habitat: Grassland without mixed deciduous forest canopy comprises ideal habitat for Nilgai, Blackbuck, Chinkara, Bustard and small game. The grass and bushy cover supply them with food and shelter. Since the tendency to plough grass lands has grown, and owing to the encroachment of livestock upon grass land, the above species and their habitat are threatened. Again, owing to the ease with which these 'lowland' game animals are killed, they are decreasing at an alarming rate, in spite of the existing laws and regulations giving them protection. It is evident that game species such as Blackbuck and Chinkara have been reduced to danger point in Saurashtra State. And this may well apply also to other States within the zone. It means that unless these species are given adequate protection, they are open to the hazards of extirpation. As for forest land, the game within is comparatively less reduced but is nowhere in abundance. In my report of the rapid survey of wildlife and game, 1950, in the States of Rajasthan, Madhya Bharat, and Saurashtra, which are now within my region, I had emphasised upon the need for protecting wildlife and game and left no stone unturned in advising and supplying the States with useful information on National Parks, Sanctuaries, Wildlife Boards and Wildlife Department, etc., etc. Since then very little progress has been made, apart from what has been done by the Bombay and Saurashtra States. It is unfortunate that the Rajpramukhs and their Governments have neglected the subject of wildlife preservation. Assessment of the Effectiveness of Existing Legislation Bombay and Saurashtra have, as mentioned earlier, made their own Wildlife Acts known as the Bombay Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act, 1951 and the Saurashtra Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act XXXII of 1952. The Saurashtra Act has been amended as advised by the State Wildlife Advisory Board. This will make the Act one of the best in India. The State Board in its second meeting have recommended 'Protected Areas' for saving Chinkara and Blackbuck

202

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

especially, and each district will have two such areas each for the safety of the species. The Grey Hornbill has been declared a protected bird, but I fear that this measure is too late. The same might be said in the case of the Great Indian Bustard; however, some birds are still to be seen. State departments such as Police, Forest and Revenue should take a keener interest in seeing that regulations like Close Season, etc., are observed. The Military, particularly, are the greatest offenders of shooting regulations and certain areas of wildlife abundance have been completely ruined by them. If any Wildlife Act is to be effective, the magistrates and judicial councillors should fully understand and realise the importance of Wildlife as a national asset and lawbreakers should be heavily punished. From information gathered from various States, it appears that there is not enough cooperation from State Departments or from the public for stamping out indiscriminate killing of game and for enforcing the existing laws pertaining to wildlife protection. Sanctuaries in the States have not been effectively managed and wildlife is being killed at a rapid rate. It is therefore of vital importance that the Government of India should nominate Committees consisting of experts to tour all States to see for themselves the position of wildlife population and then advise the States on how to manage their wildlife resources. These Touring Committees would organise, where necessary, 'Game Censuses', so as to estimate the density of game population. I strongly emphasise the importance of having Touring Committees, which may actually see or investigate on the spot how wildlife is managed, and whether it is given the necessary protection or not. In spite of repeated warnings of wildlife depletion the progress made for protecting game species has been painfully slow, and in some cases much too late. However, if even now other States were to follow in the footsteps of Bombay and Saurashtra, they would gain considerably in protecting their wildlife before it vanishes completely. I have come to the conclusion that, it is essential for the States to inaugurate 'Protected Areas' where Sanctuaries in the strict sense, cannot be established, as early as possible and, with the aid of the Central Government, create National Parks immediately.

T H E N E H R U YEARS

203

In the interests of State Governments to ensure that their wildlife is adequately protected and that areas of Sanctuaries or Preserves are being managed satisfactorily, I even suggest District Wildlife Committees, consisting of the following persons: Collector, District Superintendent of Police, Divisional Forest Officer and one unofficial Honorary Game Warden. This team could tour important areas together and assess the wildlife population of the district from time to time. journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 52 (1955), pp. 865-73.

By 1955 Dharmakumarsinhji had completed his unique treatise on the 'Birds of Saurashtra', and would later in the 50's complete a guide to the census of larger animals. What critical years 1953, 1954, and 1955 must have been for wildlife! This was the time for big dams and hydroelectric projects. Our then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru believed that these projects were the temples of modern India and would lead to rapid development. If only he knew. These so-called modern temples ripped apart large tracts of splendid forests. Nehru was not wildlife or forest savvy. Little was he to know that in the next decade when his daughter would rule, she would create some of the most dynamic policies to protect the rich remnants of the wilderness from its modern temples. In a way if Nehru's policies towards forests were exploitative, his daughter's would be protective. But the conservationists of those days did not have an Indira Gandhi to deal with. So people like Gee kept on writing and fighting. Between 1954 and 1960 he was forever reiterating his stand on a series of issues. I highlight a few of them here: The Management of India's Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks By E.P. Gee, M.A., C.M.Z.S. Part-II Poaching With regard to poaching and similar illegal practices, it has been the experience of the writer and many of his friends in India that the forest

204

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

department is a little 'touchy on this subject when instances are brought to its notice. When I visit a sanctuary I usually talk to the Range Officer or Beat Officer-in-charge, and sooner or later put the question: 'Do you have any difficulty with poachers? Is any poaching going on here?' The answers to this enquiry fall broadly into two categories. One is: 'No, sir, this is a sanctuary. How can there be poaching in a sanctuary?' The other is: 'There is some poaching going on. We are trying our best to stop it.' Obviously the former answer indicates a doubtful or even most unsatisfactory state of affairs, while the latter is almost certainly an accurate and honest statement. Divisional forest officers and even Conservators are also often evasive or non-committal when the subject of poaching is brought up by members of the public. How often the writer and other members of the general public have travelled many miles at great expense and discomfort to visit a sanctuary or Reserved Forest, and when we report a case of poaching, no reply or even acknowledgement is ever received! If a visitor or member of the public detects a case of poaching or similar malpractice, what is he to do about it? Is he to remain silent? Or is he to take the trouble to note the details and report the incident? Obviously to remain silent is not only to fail in one's duty as a citizen but also actually to render a disservice to the forest department. For in remaining silent he is almost conniving at the offence. It is clearly the duty of everyone to assist the forest department by noting carefully anything serious that he sees wrong and by reporting it to the appropriate officer as soon as possible. Why then is it so often the case that in so doing one's duty, no reply— not even an acknowledgement is received, the person reporting is led to wonder (a) if the report has ever been received, or (b) if received, if any action is being taken. In either case a sense of frustration is the result. In order to minimise poaching, for complete elimination would be impracticable, it is obvious that only cooperation between the public and the authorities will produce any real results. The public can cooperate by developing a strong healthy public opinion, and by reporting all cases of malpractice as they occur.

THE N E H R U YEARS

205

It is recognised throughout the world that the presence of bona fide sportsmen in shooting blocks, and bona fide visitors and naturalists in sanctuaries and national parks is the best deterrent against poaching. It is plainly the duty of such people to assist the authorities at all times and at all places, and it is equally obligatory on the authorities at least to acknowledge such assistance whenever it is rendered. Without doubt India has a unique opportunity of developing sound but broad-minded systems of wildlife conservation and national park administration, even improving on those policies and systems evolved in other parts of the world. And with her wildlife situated as it is mostly in beautiful tree forests as opposed to bare scrub areas of, say, East Africa, she has the chance of creating and developing some of the finest faunal national parks in the world. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 52 (1954), pp. 717-32.

In a way, I think India lost her opportunities of creating the finest National Parks in the world. Gee would have been a very disappointed man. If only he had known. We learnt nothing from the African models and we still do not even accept that some of them work in the greater interest of wildlife. We are still plagued with all the problems Gee talked about in the 1950s—from VIP tourism to the enforcement of laws, and the non-implementation of the endless recommendations that have piled up and collected dust over the decades. That is the sorry state of wildlife governance in India and we shall see later on the crisis that emerged when the century ended. Like many of us, I am certain that Gee had faith in the system to deliver, and so kept waiting and writing: The Management of India's Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks By E.P. Gee, M.A., C.M.Z.S. Part-Ill Extracts: Sport and Wildlife Preservation It is important that we should recognize the exact status of the sportsman when considering measures for wildlife preservation in India. By

206

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

'sportsman' I mean, of course, the bona fide sportsman who not only scrupulously observes the game laws and shooting rules in respect of close seasons, protected animals, reserved forests, and so on, but who also shoots only a limited number of game birds and animals. The so-called 'sportsman' who is a butcher, or who is in any way unscrupulous, is a menace to wildlife conservation almost as much as the poacher is. It is universally admitted by all those concerned with conservation of wildlife throughout the world that the bona fide sportsman is one of the best friends of wildlife. For by occasionally tracking and shooting game within the law, he becomes well versed in jungle lore and jungle craft and develops a knowledge and love of wild animals and birds not always obtainable by the man who is purely an observer or naturalist. The bona fide sportsman who later in life gives up all shooting for the camera, binoculars, and notebook is usually one of the ablest protagonists of wildlife conservation. It is universally admitted, also, that the presence of a bona fide sportsman in a forest is the most effective deterrent against poachers. Obviously no sportsman who has paid for and taken out licences, permits, and reservations in a Forest Block is going to tolerate any kind of interference from poachers during his shoot. And even if there has been any poaching previous to his shoot he will soon hear about it and 'raise hell'. For this reason poachers usually give sportsmen a very wide berth. And for this reason many experienced sportsmen all over India have been made Honorary Forest Officers in order to assist the Forest Departments of States in the preservation of wildlife. At the meeting of the Executive Committee of the Indian Board for Wildlife held at Ootacamund in May 1955 it was agreed that Game, Shooting, and Fishing Associations play a very important role, and that real sportsmen in any area are an asset in the preservation of wildlife. Consequent upon this, the Secretary of the Board in October 1955 addressed a letter to all Heads of State Forest Departments to the effect that Game Associations and Natural History Societies should be encouraged. And yet, in spite of all the foregoing evidence that bona fide sportsmen are an asset to the country in general and to the forest department in particular, how often do we hear of sportsmen being rebuffed, of

THE N E H R U YEARS

207

sportsmen receiving no replies to their letters, of sportsmen not being issued with shooting and fishing permits after payment of the usual fees! Worse still, many sportsmen and naturalists have written helpful reports about poaching, bombing of rivers for fish, and other illegalities to the Forest Officers, but not even an acknowledgement! It is essential to preserve the wildlife outside as well as inside our sanctuaries and national parks; and no real progress can be made in India until full encouragement and recognition is given to genuine sport and genuine sportsmen throughout the country. Conclusion Unless we can produce evidence of the economic or tourism value of our wildlife sanctuaries, the other values (aesthetic, recreational, scientific, and biological) may not be sufficient to tip the scales in favour of their maintenance and continuance. Our statesmen, politicians, planners, economists, and others may give heed to the unwise ephemeral demands of unenlightened local interests, instead of considering the need for longterm planning and preservation for the benefit of the country as a whole. Tourists from abroad and visitors from other parts of India coming to our wildlife sanctuaries and national parks will bring revenue as well as the general realization of the value of our wildlife. This revenue and this realization are both sorely needed to preserve for posterity a valuable but vanishing national asset. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 54, No. 1 (1956), pp. 1-5, 9, 10, 16, 17, 20 & 21.

As far as I am concerned, the 1950s was Gee's decade. He dominated these years with his ideas and suggestions. He fought for wildlife on the Indian Board of Wildlife, he wrote frequently on a variety of issues that Indian wildlife faced, and he tried really hard to create political will particularly with people like Nehru. That is why the issue of the economic importance of wildlife tourism was back on the agenda. Because of the pressures of those times there were always arguments for and against wildlife protection. Why were national parks important? Could they bring

208

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

in the revenue? Could the politician be persuaded to save them? Gee battled on and fought the then inspector general of forests for his dictat that only if a forest officer has shot a tiger could he be p u t in charge of a forest division. He came u p with an alternative that every forest officer should be able to catch a fish with a rod and line! He wrote and I quote: 'Fifty years ago it might have been all right. But if every divisional forest officer in India today were to bag a tiger there would be no tigers left.' I believe that in the 1950s Gee played a much stronger role in conservation than either Salim Ali or another naturalist of those times, M. Krishnan. This role of Gee's changed only in the 1960s. Let's not forget that Gee started his work as early as 1933 on the hornbills of Assam much before most of his colleagues... . Gee was an Englishmen and educated at Cambridge University. He had stayed on after independence and, in my opinion, surpassed the conservation efforts of all his Indian colleagues. It was Nehru who wrote the foreword for his book on Indian Wildlife at the end of the 1950s. It was clear that the decimation of wildlife was accelerating, the forests were vanishing, and by the time India entered the 1960s many raised their voices on the morals of how to hunt and how much. Let us go back for a moment to the 1950s, which was a decade of devastation for wildlife and much of that responsibility goes to the Princes of India. Mahesh Rangarajan describes it succinctly: Princely India left behind a mixed legacy. There is no doubt that many of today's famous nature reserves from Gir in the west to Bandipur in the south had their origins as royal hunting reserves. But to see the princes' efforts as conservationists in present-day terms would go against their own records of their deeds. Many exceeded the British in their lust for trophies. They used the rules of the hunt to oppress their subjects at times endangering the latter's lives and much more often offending their sense of human dignity. And this is absolutely true. The hunting records of the Indian Princes completely outstripped those of the British in their tens of thousands. Let us never forget that fact. The 1960s posed many moral dilemmas. How much to hunt and how? Shikar travel

T H E N E H R U YEARS

209

agencies had flourished and who would ever have the will to control the horrors of this so-called sport. Let us look at some of the letters that went back and forth at that time. Wildlife Problems Mr. Humayun Abdulali's notes on Wildlife in the Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society (Vol. 56 (2): 1959) make sad reading. The disillusioning thing is that it is not only in Madhya Pradesh that these conditions prevail. They seem to be common all over the subcontinent. I often wonder whether we are not fighting an almost impossible battle in trying to protect the wildlife of our country. I am a tea planter and live in the High Ranges of Kerala and I have had the opportunity of studying this protection problem at close quarters. I have come to certain conclusions and quote them for your perusal. 1. The vast majority of our people have never heard of the Indian Board for Wildlife, do not know what it stands for, and have no idea about the work it is doing. 2. The vast majority of our people have yet to develop a genuine interest in wildlife. I mean sufficient interest to worry about its welfare. It is highly idealistic to expect a man to treat the Great Indian Bustard with respect when he does not know-what the bird looks like, has no appreciation of how it is being rapidly wiped out, and does not understand why we wish to prevent its extermination. To the miscreant his bustard is a goodly bird that will do well for the evenings pot. Similarly, I know of numerous cases ofJungle fowl, spur fowl and Painted Bush Quail snared in traps in the tea and jungle in these hills nearly all the year round. I have watched shot guns go after these birds with the 'same degree of indiscrimination. I have seen Rainbow Trout floating on our waters after being poisoned. I have seen how a species of mountain goat has been nearly exterminated in these hills. I have known of healthcrazy parties going out to slaughter Black Monkeys for medicinal purposes. I have heard that a flourishing trade in bison meat exists in the foothills of the High Ranges. I was not surprised to read that Mr. and Mrs. T.H. Basset were 'horrified to see two figures carrying rifles' in the Periyar Sanctuary. This is typical of what goes on all the time.

210

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

3. It does not matter how many big names are associated with our Wildlife Board. What is important is the influence it has in successfully getting the State Governments to adopt and enforce its resolutions. 4. One Wildlife Week a year is totally insufficient for our needs What we need is a Wildlife Century in our country. 5. The Wildlife Board and a Society like ours must make concerted attempts to educate our people about natural history. How we can do this is best left to a subcommittee and to interested educationists. Personally, I think it calls for more emphasis on nature study in our school curricula from the earliest stages. 6. Steps must be taken to see that poachers are really severely punished. There is no point in passing resolutions and making laws if they cannot be enforced. In the final analysis it all depends on whether we, as a people, want to save our wildlife or not. If we do not there is very little that Societies and individuals can do in the matter. Periavurrai Estate M.A. Khan Munnar P.O., Kerala State, S. India, November 22, 1959. [We fully agree with our correspondent that so far the Indian Board for Wildlife has not been conspicuously effective in the purpose for which it was constituted. Reports from all over the country continue to confirm the fact that the wildlife position is steadily deteriorating; poaching and illicit misuse of crop protection guns, and illegal practices of every kind are on the increase. The members of the Board have stressed again and again, at each successive meeting, that perhaps our most pressing need at the present time is publicity and educating the public to realize that our wildlife is a national asset. As our correspondent points out, it is quite true that the vast majority of people are unaware of the very existence of the Wildlife Board and of the work it is intended to be doing. In a country where literacy is as low as in ours, the only effective way of educating the public on the problems of wildlife and the need for its protection would seem to be the movie film. Every successive meeting of the

THE N E H R U YEARS

211

Board has reiterated the urgent need for film documentaries on Indian wildlife for countrywide 'plugging' in cinemas in an earnest attempt to awaken interest in the problem. Yet, today, eight years after the formation of the Wildlife Board, we are not yet aware that any such film has been produced by the Films Division. If such a film has been produced the secret has been well kept. We have not heard of any one having seen it. The Society has certainly never been consulted about its making as one would reasonably have expected. It is obvious that the high-ups both in the Central and State governments are not seriously interested in the problem. Otherwise it is inconceivable that so little would be done about it. It is a disheartening state of affairs and we can sympathize with the pessimistic note struck in the last para above.] journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 57 (1960), pp. 218-19.

Some Sorry Notes on Wildlife in N.W. Madhya Pradesh In mid-December 1958,1 was invited to a week's shoot in one of the old Rajputana States (now in northern Madhya Pradesh) and, as I had not been into that country before, I gladly accepted. Before, in and after we moved into camp we met the Sub-Divisional Officer, the Collector of the District, and the District Superintendent of Police, and in the course of our several conversations were jointly and generally informed that shooting from cars and jeeps was permissible and in fact the only manner in which shikar was practised. Our protest against this form of 'sport' was politely turned aside as impracticable and idealistic. More than one official claimed to have recently shot the Great Indian Bustard. Our camp was outside a village surrounded by cultivation, and a mile away was a shallow ravine 50 to 200 yards wide and covered with thorny scrub interspersed with the dhak (Butea monosperma). This was said to hold tiger, and with the assistance of our host, the local landlord, three beats were arranged, one necessitating the employment of almost a hundred beaters. There were several tiger in the 5-mile length of the ravine but the beats were all made in an amateurish and haphazard manner

212

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and the animals never showed themselves. Chital were twice said to have broken back but I did not see any animals at all. Beats were arranged in forested areas further away with similar results, though chital, sambar, and nilgai were seen. The beaters always included several persons armed with muzzle-loading guns. The Indian Arms Act has recently come into operation in this area and some of these guns were not yet covered by any form of licence. All tigers are termed cattle-lifters or man-eaters and receive no protection at all and Government officers travelling in the districts carried loaded weapons and shot at all they saw, both by day and night. In this area, the slaughter of cattle is prohibited and there were fewer goats and sheep than in any other place in India that I could remember. The shortage of meat was acute and formed a problem to which I had not had my attention so forcibly drawn before. Our host was a Jain landlord, and the food which he very kindly sent to camp was entirely vegetarian. The few partridge which we shot were not enough to prevent everybody from becoming meat-hungry. Attached to our camp was an enthusiastic shikari who had done a fair amount of poaching when the shooting was controlled by the Ruler of the State, and he now shot deer and antelope at night whenever a jeep or other suitable conveyance was available. On the first night we drove out in a jeep for about 10 miles and the local shikaris immediately produced spotlights, operated on the car battery, with which they searched the fields and forests in an expert manner. With the greatest difficulty, shooting was restrained and in the course of the drive we saw several small parties of nilgai and chital. They were distinctly alarmed by the noise of the car, but once the light was on them they could be approached within easy shooting distance. After we failed to shoot anything in the beats, the local enthusiasts took over the meat supply problem. They preferred to use our host's tractor rather the jeep, for once the eyes were sighted, the animals could be approached in a straight line, there being less need to go round nullahs and other obstacles! The party left after supper and were back in two hours with a chital stag and doe. Only two shots were fired, and another doe got away wounded!

THE N E H R U YEARS

213

We were in one of the few parts of the country where tiger and deer still existed in some numbers. But the tigers in the forest have been shot out or driven into the scrub-covered ravines where a jeep cannot reach them and which do not afford enough cover to the deer. The tigers have, therefore, to pick up cattle from the adjoining villages while the deer that have survived the shooting are in the forests separated by miles of cultivation. Though relatively safe from the tigers, they come into the fields at night and are indiscriminately shot whenever they can be seen from jeeps or tractors. My experience is restricted to a relatively small area, but it did appear that this anomalous distribution of tigers and deer was widespread. Unless the Indian Board for Wildlife is able to carry out more actively the work which it has undertaken, both tiger and deer will be completely gone in a few years. All officers no doubt have in their files cyclostyled copies of the resolutions passed at the first meeting of the Board held in 1951, stating that wild animals should not be shot at night from cars and listing the Great Indian Bustard as one of the birds which is in urgent need of protection throughout the country. Every year we hold a Wildlife Week, presumably to draw the attention of the public to the resolutions of the Board, but seven years after the setting up of the Board we have departmental heads of districts—persons directly associated with the administration of the law and the carrying out of the Board's resolutions so ardently endorsed by the President, the Prime Minister, the Chief Ministers of States—not only ignorant of the wildlife preservation laws but utterly callous and indifferent to their enforcement when their attention is drawn to them. The need of opening up more land for cultivation is admittedly making things difficult for wildlife preservation, but there can be no doubt that if an intelligent and practical approach is made we can solve the problem. Last year 120,000 deer were shot by licence holders in the State of California alone, but the report states that this was not enough and the number left over for the following year will necessitate more deer being shot to prevent there being more animals than the country can support. No attempts at the census of wild animals, other than the lion in the Gir, have been attempted in India, but though we have many areas ecologically as good as those in California I wonder if the total number

214

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

of deer left: over the whole of India is anywhere near the number shot there annually. Bombay Natural History Society 91, Walkeshwar Road, Bombay 6 March 10, 1959. Humayun Abdulali Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 56 (1959), pp. 319-21.

Further Wildlife Notes from Madhya Pradesh—A Rejoinder In the August 1959 number Mr. Humayun Abdulali contributed a miscellaneous note about methods of shooting and conservation of wildlife in Madhya Pradesh (J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 56: 321-3). Mr. Vidya Charan Shukla, M.P., in a letter to the Society, raised strong objections to certain statements therein and some correspondence was exchanged with Mr. Abdulali thereafter. Mr. Shukla wrote to the Editors requesting that his letter be published and it was thought that certain points from Mr. Abdulali's replies should also be reproduced. As, however, personal elements had crept into the correspondence, the Editors decided to publish a comprehensive editorial note embodying as objectively as possible both points of view. Pending publication, however, Mr. Abdulali is now a Joint Editor of the Journal and the Editors considered that in fairness to Mr. Shukla his objections should be reproduced in his own words without any comments thereon omitting only passages in the nature of personal criticism. Mr. Shukla writes: 'In miscellaneous note No. 6 of Vol. 56, No. 2 of the Journal, Shri Humayun Abdulali has made certain statements which are grossly misleading and erroneous. As a person closely connected with hunting and matters pertaining to wildlife, I consider it my duty to correct such untrue reports. I am the "Managing Director of one of the leading shikar agencies in the country" who drove Shri Abdulali to Supkhar in Balaghat district to join the party of Americans who had invited him.

T H E N E H R U YEARS

215

We discussed wildlife and hunting, it being the topic of our mutual interest, and naturally came to the subject of illicit shooting. Shri Abdulali complained of shooting at night from jeeps with particular reference to our staff. I explained him that when a tiger or a panther is wily and the hunters fail to shoot it in a sit-up or beat and happen to cross it on a night drive, when out looking for vermin, shooting of which is allowed at nights from jeep, they step down with a spotlight from jeep, to hunt it and the jeep is driven away. There was no mention of spotlights being connected to the battery of the jeep and the connecting wire being rolled all along the road or the jeep being backed the prescribed distance of 100 yards in the dark. The spotlights used at such times have self-contained batteries and the jeep is reversed or turned according to the space available. The entire purpose behind restricting shooting at night from jeeps is to give a sporting chance to the animals and the method used by our hunters on such occasions affords more chances and advantages to the animals than in beats or sit-ups which are universally accepted methods of sport. From the way the shooting of bear and wild boar at night has been described in the note, it will lead to think that it was illegal. Both these animals are classed as 'vermin' and their shooting is permitted at night from jeeps. Apart from the legal aspects of the night shooting of these animals, their shooting whenever one gets a chance is morally just and warranted. In the forests, 95% of mauling instances are by bears who without any provocation attack villagers when they go to jungles to seek their livelihood. Wild pig is the greatest destroyer of crops. If the wildlife preservation is considered rationally on the basis of practical experiences and circumstances as they exist, the number of such vermins will never be allowed to grow uncontrolled under the protection of game laws to the extent of being detrimental to "man and food". Another thing Shri Abdulali has put in my mouth during my conversation with him. From the way he has reported, it implies that we had been breaking laws in the past. What I told him was that in the earlier years of our business, our hunters did unwittingly shoot a few animals in violation of game laws; but the redeeming factor was that the matter was immediately brought to the notice of the forest authorities

216

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and due punishment was meted out for the same. I had taken the trouble to impress that such instances were due to inexperience of our staff and now we have gained more experience, the cases of game law violation are rare. The note poses a question whether it is a wise policy to "sell" the remains of our wildlife in the temptation of earning a few more dollars. A critical study of the problem of wildlife preservation at first hand will show that the real menace to our wildlife is from poaching by our own people over which neither any control is beirig exercised nor is being desired; and not from hunting by foreigners who without exception shoot only on valid permits and strictly restricted number of animals allowed to them. A complete watch on their shooting is always kept. The wildlife preservation will never assume the importance it deserves unless it shows immediate economic benefits and shikar tourism from abroad gives a certain economic value to our well-stocked forests. Mr. Abdulali himself admits the well-stocking of our forests when he says the party, whose guest he was shot its quota in 10 days; but did they in any way exceed the game limit allowed to them? How are they or other foreign hunters guilty of destroying wildlife if they shoot within the limits allowed to them which is set by the Forest Department after a survey of the wildlife population? No country in the world has stopped sport-hunting to protect its common run of wildlife for the obvious reason that essentially the hunters who particularly understand the wildlife preservation problem have its interest in their hearts.' Bombay Natural History Society, 91, Walkeshwar Road, Bombay 6 November 1, I960 Editors Journal ofBombay Natural History Society, Vol. 57 (1960), pp. 655-7.

These were bits and pieces of really interesting conversation, dialogue, and letters from a variety of people about the state of what was happening all over forest India. Let us not forget that in 1960 V.C. Shukla was the owner of a hunting travel agency and was a reputed hunter. He did not know then that in the decade of

THE N E H R U YEARS

217

the 1960s he would be a Cabinet minister serving Indira Gandhi. And very quickly all his hunting exploits would stop. The 1960s were the worst time for India's forests and wildlife. This decade revealed the horrors of the 50s. P.D. Stracey in his book, Wildlife in India looks at the crisis of these years: This book has been compiled as the result of an urge to contribute something towards the saving of the wildlife of India before it is too late. As one who has been both a shikari and a conservationist throughout a career as a forest officer in Assam and who has witnessed, heard and read of the destruction of wildlife at an increasingly rapid pace during the past few years while being associated with measures for its conservation, I have become gradually filled with the realisation that the situation is rapidly deteriorating to the point of no recovery. As a practical administrator I have often been impatient with mere words and latterly I have increasingly felt that while considerable planning for the preservation of wildlife is in the air not much of it is reaching the ground fast enough to be of use. This compilation is admittedly a mere collection of 'words' but if it can contribute some stimulus to the campaign of saving India's wildlife, it is as much as one can hope for under the circumstances. What India's wildlife now needs is an attempt at a reasoned argument for its correct management and a large plea for its preservation—and this is what the book attempts. The decline started and with greater rapidity from about the middle of the 19th century with the increase in the number of sporting weapons and the development, in succession, of the large-bore rifle in 1840 and the express rifle in I860. The early British army officers, tea planters and the civil servants were, in many cases, heavy despoilers of game. The records prove it. Eighty lions were shot by one cavalry officer in Kathiawar in those days; today there are no lions left in that part of the country. Fourteen lions were once shot in the Gir forest in one day. In Central India and Hyderabad two hundred and twenty-seven tigers were killed by a British sportsman up to 1903 and one hundred and forty-seven by another in the Central Provinces during a service life which ended in 1930. In the Oriental Sporting Magazine of 1876 it is recorded that a sportsman in the Bengal Dooars, probably a planter, fired about one

218

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

hundred shots at rhinoceroses in one day, killing five and wounding more than twenty-five. In Assam Colonel Pollock, a military engineer, engaged in laying out roads in the Brahmaputra valley, practically shot a rhino or a buffalo for breakfast everyday, to judge from the descriptions he has left! F.B. Simson, author of Sport in Eastern Bengal shot five to six hundred tigers in twenty-one years in India, towards the end of the last century. It was not long before the infection spread to the then ruling princes. In the shoots organised by Maharajah Nripendra Narayan of Cooch Behar between 1871 and 1907, no less than 370 tigers, 208 rhinoceroses, 430 buffaloes and 324 barasingha deer were shot, in addition to many other animals. The late Maharajah of Rewa shot 616 tigers during his life time while the Maharajah of Surguja, who is still alive, holds the record with 1116 tigers. Nor was the destruction confined to animals and to tigers in particular. In Kashmir one sportsman accounted for 58,613 wild fowl between the years 1907 to 1919 or an average of over 4500 birds per annum. In the 1938 shoot at the Keoladeo Ghana of Bharatpur for the Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, 4273 ducks and geese were killed, the Viceroy himself firing 1900 shots. In Bikaner the record for the shooting of Imperial Sandgrouse at the Gajnar Lake was 11,000 birds with thirty-five guns in two days. Such figures stagger the imagination and are quoted here solely in the interests of conservation. This period of'grow-more-food', coming as it did close on the heels of the war years when heavy depletion of wildlife stocks took place in many parts of India wherever armies were encamped for training or for fighting, has been indeed disastrous for our animals and birds and it is safe to say that more damage has resulted in the last fifteen years than in the previous one hundred and fifty. To the cumulative effect of the war and the expansion of agriculture that followed it must be added that large numbers of gun licences have been issued since the securing of independence. Under the British administration such gun issues were restricted, for obvious reasons, but with the passing of the power into the hands of the people it was but natural to expect a much greater degree of leniency in the consideration of applications for weapon licences, whether for display, sport or crop protection. The inevitable result has been the development of a new

THE N E H R U YEARS

219

type of sportsman with a new set of sporting values, whose influence on the status of wildlife has been profound. And when in addition we consider the deadly potentialities of the mighty little jeep in the countryside, one may well doubt the chances of large-scale survival of wildlife. When the cultivator going to his fields in the morning can no longer see the blackbuck doe kicking up her heels at her lord and master with the beautiful spiral horns, or when he can no longer flush the partridge or junglefowl feeding on the verges; when his womenfolk going to collect firewood from the forests can no longer come across the scrapings of a bear or the imprint in the dust of the leopard or tiger that has passed in the night, they will have lost something that can never be replaced! Fortunately for wildlife, Indian agriculture has not yet reached the stage where thousands of acres are cultivated by machinery and where there are no trees, shrubs or weedy patches to break the monotony. 'Clean farming' is a much more important and insidious enemy of wildlife than are the natural predators. Field crops grow better, especially in a dry climate, when fields are not too extensive and are bordered by trees, shrubs or tall grasses to break the winds that dry out and disperse the soil. The need for increasing food production for human consumption in India is well recognised but crop specialists agree that much bigger results can be obtained by selecting better seed and through the use of fertilizers and modern cultivation methods rather than by clearance and ploughing up of every 'marginal' jungle patch, no matter how poor the soil and deficient the water. To the extent to which this is recognized, many species of wildlife will prosper accordingly. As regards available legislation, this will be dealt with in more detail subsequently but generally speaking the Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act or the game laws or shooting rules under the Indian Forest Act, combined with the Arms Act rules, are adequate for protection of wildlife both outside and inside reserved and protected forests, provided there is a determined and efficient machinery to enforce it. While the forest department is specifically in charge within the managed forests, 'what is everybody's business is nobody's business' may well be said of the wildlife protective machinery in areas outside such forests in India.

220

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The civil and police departments, whose function it is to administer the Arms Act rules and the Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act where it exists, are generally woefully ignorant of the rules and regulations and far too preoccupied with other duties to pay much attention to game protection. Looking back one can cite many incidents to illustrate this. In India unless more realistic and positive steps are taken and as speedily as possible, there will be no wildlife left to protect in areas outside the managed forests in a few years and the only stocks of wildlife will be found in the reserved and protected forests, in which are included the sanctuaries and national parks. Even here the comparatively stringent provisions of the Indian Forest Act require necessary modification to suit altered conditions and the normal, long-established system of protection embodied in the forest departments requires reinforcement by special staff. Elsewhere, wildlife can continue to exist only if public opinion is favourable and it is dependent to very large extent on public cooperation. To secure this a cadre of honorary wildlife wardens from among the public should be built up and a vigorous campaign of publicity and education, particularly among the youth of the country, launched. Lastly, while these measures may be expected to improve conditions in the managed forests and the areas adjoining them, certain long-term measures of insurance are to be implemented, such as the declaration of certain species as protected in areas where they are threatened, their reintroduction into areas from which they have disappeared and the creation of sanctuaries and national parks wherever conditions permit. The main responsibility for all these measures to 'rescue' wildlife will, of course, rest with the forest departments of the States but in this task the assistance, cooperation and sympathy of the civil administration is essential. In India, the real threat to wildlife and to game animals in particular, has been the great increase in the number of firearms as the result of a much more liberal policy in the issue of licences to possess weapons, partly as the result of political emancipation and partly for protection of crops in the context of grow-more-food schemes. But fundamentally it is a question of a too rapid increase in population. This has particularly affected the areas outside the Government forests but its general effect

THE N E H R U YEARS

221

has been severe. At the present rate of increase in population there will soon be no room for animals. The political situation consequent on the merging of the princely states resulted in severe depletion of game stocks, particularly of meat animals, in most of these areas. Most of the twenty-four covenanting states of Rajasthan had game laws of their own and the rulers enforced protection rigidly, though admittedly for the sake of shikar and in some cases at the expense of the crops of the people. In Indore city there were once several thousand antelopes which peacefully grazed where the present aerodrome is situated. In Rajasthan were found the true sanctuaries: in Dholpur, for instance, the Maharajah had conditioned animals and birds to feed from his hand and in Udaipur deer and wild pig would come to the call for feeding with grain at sundown, in an almost religious ritual. In Patiala there was a well-run game department and thousands of blackbuck could once be seen near the town. Overnight the game laws were abolished along with the State game departments and with the merging of the latter with the forest departments the strict care and protection disappeared and the thousands of animals that could once be seen in certain areas also disappeared. This is one of the less glorious, if more obscure, results of independence and the disappearance of the princely order. The first and most urgent measure is to control the use of cropprotection guns so that they are only used for the purpose for which they are granted and in the correct season. Their withdrawal in the areas where danger to crops is insignificant or where the danger is seasonal should be enforced. Owners of crop-protection guns and all patta-holders living on the edges of forests should be categorically warned that harbouring of outside meat hunters on their land will result in cancellation of their licences and this should be acted upon. An efficient organisation with a system of rewards for informers should be established between the civil and forest departments, which must both play their part to maintain check over poaching. Issue of gunpowder and ammunition to licensees should be curtailed and the sale of 'buck-shot' banned or severely controlled by district authorities.

222

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

A system of rewards and accelerated promotions to lower categories of civil and police officers who detect and report offences against the arms act or game laws should be applied. The trade in netted birds should be abolished or strictly licensed and the serving of game birds in restaurants or their stocking in cold-storage establishments in the close seasons prohibited. What is really needed is greater vigilance in enforcing the rules of the weapon licences by civil and police authorities. If in addition the forest department introduces more effective protection of the government forests with increased and special staff, the damage now being done by illicit shooting, abuse of the close seasons and killing of protected species and prohibited sexes, can greatly be reduced. All these measures should be accompanied by a vigorous campaign of propaganda and publicity in favour of preservation of game species and conservation of wildlife in general, particularly among the youth of the country. The sale of the meat of wild animals should be banned, for it must be recognised that such is no longer essential for human existence, as may have been the case when man was more primitive. But even if this is not practicable, stricter control of this trade is essential. Close seasons must be observed and sales in the open season must have some indication that it is the flesh of a mature male deer, such as the display of the antlers, to satisfy the law. In most cases of vending of meat of wild animals, the forest officer is powerless to act unless there are definite rules under the Forest Act defining such meat as 'forest produce' within the meaning of the law, transit rules under which such produce can be moved only under a permit and with a transit pass or challan and legal provision under which the onus of proof as regards origin of the forest produce lies on the suspect. In most States such dovetailing legal machinery is absent and it is necessary to amend the forest acts and rules in order to secure greater protection for 'meat animals'. Another direction from which wildlife is seriously threatened is that which is tied up with the habits of certain primitive groups of peoples, such as the Hos and Santhals of Bihar, the Baigas and Gonds of Madhya Pradesh, the Bhils of Bombay, the Kurubas of Mysore, the Chenchus of Andhra, the Pardis and Poligars of Madras, and the Hacharis and other tribes of Assam. These aboriginal tribes, whose passion is hunting, have

THE N E H R U YEARS

223

practically laid waste their jungles in the matter of wildlife and as their diet is practically omnivorous the damage is general and not confined only to the customarily recognised meat animal. The large number of man-eaters reported recently from parts of Orissa can quite easily be accounted for by the destruction of their natural prey, deer and pig, by these people. Tribal people employ dogs and fire to drive game and all manner of traps and devices to capture animals and birds and are expert marksmen with the bow and arrow. The use of birdlime to capture birds is probably the most destructive method and one that takes toll indiscriminately. The Kacharis of Assam stretch a long, wide-meshed net across the countryside and then drive game into it; everything living that runs into the net is killed with spears and staves. Other tribes like the Mikirs of Assam poison water with the bark of certain climbers and kill all the fish in the locality. In the North Cachar Hills of Assam there is a practice of destroying birds which are attracted to fires lit at night at certain times of the year for the purpose. The Nagas of Assam have virtually exterminated wildlife, even birds, in their hills particularly since the war when large quantities of weapons came into their possession. There is no longer any room for these primitive and destructive tribal practices and their eradication is an essential step in the restoration of wildlife in certain parts of the country, though it is realised that this may, as in certain cases like the traditional 'hakwa shikar' of the Hos of Bihar or 'Parad' of the Bastar tribes, impinge on tribal ways of life and result in some curtailment of supplies of meat. Rehabilitation of the several tribes scattered over India who are professional bird and animal trappers and killers and of those tribes who at present live on hunting and forest produce is urgently called for. Turning to the details of the legislation, we find that wildlife in India had received a fair amount of protection under British administrators. The Indian Forest Act (1879, 1927, 1950) and its adaptations in States is administered by the forest departments and gives basic protection to wildlife in reserved and protected forests as follows: Prohibition of shooting, fishing and poisoning water, setting of traps and snares: Section 26(1) Reserved Forests, Section 32(J) Protected Forests.

224

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Prohibition of killing or capturing of elephants or capturing of elephants in areas where the Elephant Preservation Act of 1879 is not in force: Section 33(J) Protected Forests, Section 26(J) Reserved Forests. The penalties under these sections are imprisonment for a term up to six months or fine up to Rs 500, or both, vide Section 26 for Reserved Forests and Section 32 for Protected Forests. The State Governments may make rules 'generally to carry out the provision of the Act' under Section 76. The power to compound offences on payment by a person, against whom a 'Reasonable suspicion exists of having committed a forest offence', of a sum of money not exceeding Rs 50 by way of compensation for the offence, is vested by notification with forest officers of rank not inferior to that of a Ranger and drawing a monthly salary of not less than Rs 100, under Section 68 of the Act. In addition to the Indian Forest Act there was the 1887 Act for the Preservation of Wild Birds and Game, or the 'Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act' as it became in 1912. This Act is applicable to all types of areas and in areas outside the reserves is administered by the civil and police departments of the States to which it has been extended, though in reality it is a dead letter. The Act applies in the first instance to certain specified wild birds and animals notified from time to time and close seasons are declared for them as considered necessary. The penalties under the Act are fine up to Rs 50 and for every subsequent conviction, imprisonment up to one month or fine up to Rs 100, or both. Nothing done in defence of property or of human life is an offence, however, confiscation of the animal or bird may be ordered in addition to the punishments. Besides these acts, certain special pieces of legislation have been in existence for some time, such as the Elephant Preservation Act of 1879, the Indian Fisheries Act of 1897, the Assam Rhinoceros Preservation Act and the Bengal Rhinoceros Protection Act. As the result of the impetus given to wildlife conservation in recent years after the formation of the Indian Board of Wildlife, some State Governments have been overhauling their wildlife legislation. The Bombay Wild Birds and Animals Protection Act of 1951 is an advanced piece of legislation, which has been recommended as a model for other States, and some mention of it is necessary here.

THE N E H R U YEARS

225

There is great need for the rewriting of the rules concerning wildlife and their compilation in handy book form to show the close seasons, protected species, and prohibited sexes for ready reference. If drawings or photographs illustrating the various species and their local names are added it will greatly assist in their identification. Among the public generally there is great ignorance of the rules while among officials and even staff of the forest departments, there is both ignorance and indifference, which is not aided by inscrutability of the rules in question. Some States publish their rules in handy book form, but they are practically repetitions of the legal provisions and schedules under the act and require considerable study to be clearly understood by the average person. What is wanted is a brief but adequate presentation of all the restrictions on the destruction of wild life in a form that can be readily comprehended. What is important is the absence of a special organisation to protect wildlife in areas outside reserved and protected forests and in this respect the African models are worthy of imitation. When the onerous duties of the existing forest departments and the impossibility of their being able to deal adequately with wildlife protection is appreciated, the seriousness of the position will be realised. Unless the enforcement of existing protective laws is improved the situation will continue to deteriorate until in a short time there will be no wildlife left outside the Government forests, while inside them it will be greatly reduced. The need for publicity and education in the service of wildlife is urgent. One of the greatest obstacles in India which the wildlife enthusiast has to face is the comparatively uneducated state of the very class of society which he has to convince of the utility of wildlife and the need to preserve it, the man in the street and particularly the rural dweller. And yet it is certain that wildlife can survive only if the people wish it to do so. Top-level planning for conservation of wildlife can be thorough and far reaching but if it is not accompanied by adequate publicity, propaganda and education, the effect will be lost. Side by side with a strong policy of enforcement of wildlife legislation there should be an intensive campaign of propaganda and publicity, designed to remove false ideas with regard to wild animals and birds and their exaggerated harmful effects on man, his crops and his kin and at

226

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

the same time to convince people in regard to the need for conservation of wildlife for inherent values. This propaganda must be honest and there must be no attempt to conceal or distort facts, while at the same time it must be scientifically based to convince people. It must be particularly aimed at India's youth and the village and rural dweller, who lives more close to wildlife than the educated sportsman. The latter should undertake the task by banding themselves into associations for the preservation of wildlife and for propaganda and education on the need for it. Such propaganda and education can succeed most if directed at the youth of the country, for the 'youth of today are the conservationists of tomorrow. Wildlife in India: Its Conservation and Control, P.D. Stracey, IFS, 1963.

It was by early 1964 that E.P. Gee's book The Wildlife of India got published. This, to me, signifies the end of the Nehru era and the beginning of the Gandhi era. E.P. Gee was very clear about how he perceived the end of 1950's. Let us look at an extract from this book: As I see it, there can be no doubt that, at the present rate of cutting vegetation, overgrazing by domestic stock and killing of wild animals in India, by the time public opinion can rally in support of wise conservation of wildlife there will be practically nothing left to conserve. There will be very little wildlife left by the year AD 2000, only thirty-six years from now, except in zoological gardens. The first to go will, generally speaking, be the large mammals and birds, especially those which are edible. Smaller mammals and birds, particularly the latter which can escape by flying, will be the last to disappear. Imagine the year 2000, with the only wildlife consisting of those creatures which can adapt themselves easily to thickly populated areas, such as jackals, rats, mice, vultures, pariah and Brahminy kites, crows and sparrows! How the inhabitants of the future would miss the lovely sight of a snowy white cattle egret gracefully alighting on the back of a rhino placidly grazing among the flowering reeds and grasses of Kaziranga! What would

THE N E H R U YEARS

227

the Gir Forest be like if, bereft of its stunted trees, there were no noble lions and lionesses with their cubs to enrich our lives? Can one imagine Bandipur without its magnificent 'bison', or Periyar without its lordly elephants, or Kanha without its elegant swamp deer? Or Bharatpur without its wonderful congregation of breeding waterbirds? If the spectacular tiger, the proud peacock and all the other splendid denizens of the forests and grasslands were to cease to exist, then how dull life would be! If nature conservation could be considered important in India as long ago as 300 BC and 242 BC, it should surely be accepted as a first-priority necessity at the present time. The existence of a sound nature and wildlife conservation organisation in a country is a reliable indication of a stage of a country's progress and development. There is very good chance that the leaders, planners and people of India will see the 'writing on the wall', and that they will not fail today in their duty of preserving the country's heritage of forests and fauna for those of tomorrow. It was this piece of E.P. Gee that really brings the Nehru era to an end. We need to briefly examine for a moment what Nehru said and did for the forests and wildlife of India from 1947 to 1964. Jawaharlal Nehru was a great statesman but did he have any political will for saving forest India? His first words that I was able to find on the subject were in March 1949 at the annual convocation of the Forest Research Institute in Dehradun: 'I am a lover of mountains and forests and birds and animals that live in them. I am keenly interested in India's forests and in their playing a full part in promoting the prosperity of the country.' In 1956 he stated: Our forests are essential for us from many points of view. Let us preserve them as it is. We have destroyed them far too much. It is true that as population grows, the need for greater food production becomes necessary. But this should be by more intensive cultivation and not by the destruction of the forests, which play a vital part in the nation's economy.

228

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Somehow I am convinced that Nehru did not do enough for the forests of India. In his foreword to E.P. Gee's The Wildlife of India, Nehru quoted from his own writing in 1956: Wildlife? That is how we refer to the magnificent animals of our jungles and the beautiful birds that brighten our lives. I wonder sometimes what these animals and birds think of man and how they would describe him if they had the capacity to do so. I rather doubt if their description would be very complimentary to man. In spite of our culture and civilization, in many ways man continues to be not only wild, but more dangerous than any of the so-called wild animals ... I welcome this new interest in India in the preservation of wildlife. I cannot say that we should preserve that form of wildlife which is a danger in our civilized haunts or which destroys our crops. But life would become very dull and colourless if we did not have these magnificent animals and birds to look at and to play with. We should, therefore, encourage as many sanctuaries as possible for preservation of what yet remains of our wildlife. From 1947 to 1964—the Nehru-era—wildlife had been mauled to the brink of extinction in India. Nehru's understanding of the issues was simplistic and limited. It was 'their beauty' which was commented on and from a distance. In a way for him this was not a priority area and this is one of the primary reasons that forests and wildlife suffered at this time—it was and will always be remembered as an era of exploitation. Indira Gandhi would soon be in power and the attitudinal differences between father and daughter were remarkably like the difference between the sky and the earth. Nehru in his younger days had by fluke killed a bear in Kashmir and then an incident with a little antelope that fell wounded at his feet and died left him little ardour for blood sports and shikar. He talks of the antelope and states: 'This harmless little animal fell down at my feet wounded to death and looked up at me with its great big eyes full of tears. Those eyes have often haunted me since.' I suppose we should consider ourselves lucky that Nehru was not a hunter. A typical example of his address on forests and

THE N E H R U YEARS

229

wildlife issues is to be found in 1958. In his inaugural address to the third session of the Indian Board for Wildlife at New Delhi on 15 February, 1958 he said: I am very glad of this opportunity of paying my tribute to the importance of the work you have in hand. There are present here, I presume, experts on the subject and I am no expert and my only qualification for being here today is my love of animals and birds and I am often not only surprised but greatly distressed at the general lack of interest in the subject in this country. Of course, there are plenty of individuals who take interest, but broadly speaking, it is not one that interests people here. I don't feel it is the fault of the people so much as perhaps the lack of opportunity for directing their minds to it and the first thing that I have, therefore, to suggest to you is that your Board should produce good readable books on the subject—books for children, because presumably if the grownups have not thus far developed a love of animals, they are not likely to do so, they become rigid in their thinking. But children normally take to them and if encouraged will develop great interest. Therefore, I do hope that your Board will help in producing good books not only for the experts but for common folk like me and more especially for children, which we could publish in our various national languages in this country; and it is obvious that books on animals and birds must have coloured pictures. I want a large number of interesting little books to come out for our children of various ages—from the earliest period to the High Schools and Colleges. So this is an idea that I have placed before you for consideration. I believe you are doing something of this kind. I am told a book on birds is likely to come out one of these days. There are in fact other books too. But I am just a little bit afraid that those of you who are experts in this matter will write for other experts and not for people like me and that will be very unfortunate because what we seek is to interest people generally. Why? Well, for a variety of reasons; one is that it is an interesting subject. It gives certain fullness to a person's life to know, to feel intimate with, animals, birds, trees and flowers. We lack that. It is

230

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

astonishing how much we lack compared to other countries. As my colleague the Minister said, we have lost all our capacity for interest in them by placing some animals on pedestals and saying that they ought to be worshipped. Anything that you worship you forget. Now it is far better to be friendly with somebody than worship him. I want people to be friendly with birds. Now our Chairman said something about the balance in nature, the equilibrium established between animals, plants and birds. I remember his writing to me some months ago expressing his great concern at the way we are going in for big projects, River Valley Projects or other matters. These great projects that we have, must necessarily interfere to some extent with the economy of the nature there. Of course, the increase of human population interferes very much with it and I fear that there is little remedy for this and unless, of course, some adequate way is found to limit the increase of human population, because otherwise they will not only eat up all the animals but they may sometimes eat up themselves too. So I hope that your Board will not only study these problems and learn much and increase your own knowledge about them but consider yourselves responsible as well, I consider one of your duties, to inform the people of India about these problems, to interest them. You should come down from expert level to the level of the common people so that they can understand and thus increase their interest in wild life. You should contact our people and tell them to know all the animals, to play with them, to love them and not to worship them. These were the first years of the Indian Board for Wildlife.1 Yet irrespective of his limited understanding Nehru tried— and much more than the political leadership of today. Reports of wholesale slaughter of wildlife, including the rare great Indian bustard and chinkara gazelles, by military personnel led the vice-president of India's foremost natural history society 1. See Appendix III.

T H E N E H R U YEARS

231

to write to the defence minister. A copy of the letter was sent to the prime minister who replied on 17 April, 1961: I received your letter of the 7th April some days ago. I immediately got in touch with our Defence Minister on the subject and I understand that he is not only enquiring into the matter, but had forbidden the vandalism to which you refer. I am glad you wrote and drew my attention to this. (As a result of the report which the defence minister received from the army headquarters on the above subject, detailed instructions for the prevention of a recurrence of this violation of shooting rules were issued. The defence minister also instructed naval and air headquarters to see that similar instructions were issued to their personnel.) The honorary secretary of India's foremost natural history society forwarded a note to Jawaharlal Nehru describing most alarming poaching and other forms of illegal 'sport' committed by many people including government officers (sometimes highranking ones) in a certain state of eastern India. He replied on 24 February, 1962: I have received your letter of the 22nd February and have read the note attached to it. I am distressed to read what you have written. I am writing to the ... Government on the subject and shall also later draw the attention of other Governments. I am afraid the Central Government cannot take charge of this matter as this would involve an amendment to the Constitution. But I think we can do something about it. In his letter dated 24 February, 1962 to the chief minister of the state concerned he wrote: I have received information that wildlife is not being protected properly in ... and is consequently rapidly disappearing. The Officers, far from looking after wildlife in the National Parks and Sanctuaries, treat them as shooting reserves for themselves and V.I.Ps.

232

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Much else has been written to me, and it has been written by a responsible person belonging to the ... Natural History Society. I am much distressed to learn of all this, and I think something drastic should be done to stop this business. I hope you will do so. It may be desirable to warn the ... Officers that any complaint of this kind coming will entail heavy punishment and even dismissal. I am told that a ... Commissioner judged of the efficiency of officers by the amount of poaching they arranged for him, and recorded his confidential remarks accordingly. On July 1962 Nehru said: When I see a healthy tree being cut, it pains me. It is as if the head of a human being is been cut. Those who cut trees should be punished and it would be better if there is a law to punish those who cut healthy trees. I am surprised at the ignorance generally displayed by the people towards things of nature. We must learn to love and understand nature and feel ourselves one with it. We have always feared nature and even worshipped it but the important thing is to understand nature and love it. We then find friends in the trees, flowers, birds and stars and our circle of friends grows. At the end of 1963, a lady in England who had been born and brought u p in India (her father was a forest officer) sent an impassioned appeal to Jawaharlal Nehru for energetic measures to be taken 'now, quickly, at once, before it is too late—to remind the nation of their unique heritage and possession, the forests and the wild animals and birds that live in them. I do beg you all to protect these things, to patrol the areas, to enforce your excellent laws, and to make new laws too to save the precious possession you now have, but which is being rapidly destroyed. Save your treasure. The last chance is now. On 4 January, 1964 Nehru replied. 'Your letter of the 14th November came to me some time ago. I quite agree with you that we should make special efforts to preserve our wildlife. I am reminding State Governments about this.'

THE N E H R U YEARS

233

As a result of this, a letter dated 10 January, 1964 was addressed by his principal private secretary to the chief secretaries to all the state governments as follows: I am desired by the Prime Minister to send you the enclosed copy of a letter dated November 14th 1963 from Mrs ... of England, in connection with the protection of wildlife in India. With her letter she has forwarded a cutting from the ... dated October 8th 1963 under the caption 'Mass Murder in the Jungle' written by ... a copy of which is also enclosed. The Prime Minister entirely agrees with Mrs ... that the laws relating to the protection of wildlife should be strictly enforced to avoid indiscriminate shooting resulting in the extinction of rare specimens of wildlife. He would like the State Governments to issue necessary instructions in this regard. Some of the last words he uttered on wildlife was in February 1964 when he was not well and in his concluding paragraph to E.P. Gee's book on Indian Wildlife he wrote: I hope this book will help in furthering interest in this fascinating subject among our young people. I agree with the author that it is much more exciting and difficult to 'shoot' with a camera than with a gun and wish that more and more adventurous young men would give up the gun in favour of the camera. We must try to preserve whatever is left of our forests and the wildlife that inhabits them. In my opinion there was much rhetoric by Nehru but little action resulted in the field over the seventeen years that he ruled. In these seventeen years the loss of forest and wildlife was enormous. In fact it was much worse than any other time in the British period. India probably lost in this period more of her natural treasures forever than at any other time in the last century. It was soon after this moment that the American Zoologist George Schaller completed his first ever study on the Indian tiger in Kanha National Park in Madhya Pradesh. He made some pertinent comments after the first ever scientific study on the tiger. This was the same area that Dunbar Brander had advocated to be made a reserve in the 1930s. This is what Schaller wrote:

234

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Independence ushered in a period of destruction that could almost be compared to the slaughter on the American prairies in the 1880s. Rejecting shooting regulations as a form of colonial repression and released from restraint, Indians shot down wildlife everywhere, including sanctuaries and private estates. As a result of food shortages the government initiated a national drive to protect crops from depredation of wild animals, and guns were issued freely to farmers, an action which literally doomed almost all animals near cultivation. For instance, G. Singh, Conservator of Forest in Punjab, wrote to me in 1964: 'Blackbuck was found in large number in central and southern parts of Punjab state until 15 years ago. Then it was treated as a crop pest and killed in large numbers. This resulted in virtual extermination of the species.' A new type of hunter emerged, too, a motorized one who drove jeeps along forest roads at night and shot at any eyes that reflected the beam of his light. For about five years the destruction continued unabated. In 1951 Bombay state passed the Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act; in 1952 the Indian Board for Wildlife was formed and in 1958 the Wildlife Preservation Society of India. Conditions improved slowly with each state government making serous attempts to preserve its fauna and to strengthen the existing shooting regulations. A number of fine but small reserves were established. But enforcement against poaching on the local level remained inadequate, with the result that the wildlife continued in its decline. Coupled with the outright destruction of wildlife by shooting was the indirect method of eliminating the habitat. As late as the sixteenth century, rhinoceros, elephant, buffalo, and other animals characteristic of fairly moist conditions occurred in parts of western India that are now covered with dry thorn scrub (Rao, 1957), indicating a rapid destruction of the habitat undoubtedly caused by misuse of the land by man (Puri, 1960). Chinese pilgrims in A.D. 600 talked of the dark jungles in the Gangetic basin, and even with virgin forest (Robertson, 1936). Today, the heavily populated Gangetic basin retains sizable patches of forest only at the base of the Himalayas, areas that were uninhabitable earlier because of malaria. Tremendous tracts of grass and reeds in the valley of the

THE N E H R U YEARS

235

Brahmaputra River were put under the plough, and Kaziranga Sanctuary remains as one of the few remnants of a habitat that once covered thousands of square miles. Forests were cleared throughout India for cultivation, and the timber was cut for use in railroad construction. After Independence the drive for more food and the unchecked increase in the population resulted in the cultivation of most marginal land. The natural vegetation cover of India is forest, but less than a quarter of the country is still covered with it. A great scourge of India's land is the vast numbers of domestic animals which are undernourished, diseased, and unproductive, yet are permitted to exist for religious reasons. The plains of West Bengal, for instance, had in 1961 a human population of 1,031 per square mile and a cattle population of 351 per square mile. The animals received only one third of their estimated daily nutritional requirements, and annual mortality due to disease was about 15 per cent (Anon., 1962). India had an estimated 204 million cattle and buffaloes and 94 million goats and sheep in 1956, of which 21 million of the former and 13 million of the latter grazed exclusively in the forests (Venkataramany, 1961). Livestock is permitted to graze without restrictions in virtually all forests and most sanctuaries, and serious damage to the vegetation culminating in widespread erosion is common particularly in the thorn and deciduous forests. The carrying capacity of many forest areas and other uncultivated lands is so far exceeded by livestock alone that a substantial amount of wildlife could not support itself even if it were protected from shooting. Livestock diseases, especially rinderpest and foot-and-mouth disease, also affect the wild ruminants. There are numerous records of gaur, chital, and others contracting diseases from cattle and dying in large numbers, whole populations having been wiped out in this manner (Brander, 1923, Ali, 1953). The health of domestic and wild hoofed animals is mainly a function of the quality of the range, and animals in poor condition as a result of malnutrition become highly susceptible to parasites and disease, making the problems of range condition and disease inseparable.

236

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

In one hundred years the combination of land clearing, uncontrolled slaughter, habitat destruction by livestock, and disease have reduced one of the world's great wildlife populations to a small remnant. Yet in spite of a realization that wildlife represents the country's fastest vanishing asset, no detailed studies of any kind have been attempted on the large mammals. India's wildlife has reached a critical stage in its survival, and the country is fortunate in possessing a sanctuary like Kanha Park, where a remnant of the peninsular fauna still exists in fair number. The park is large enough and ecologically varied enough to support a considerable wildlife population on a permanent basis, especially since the forests surrounding it provide a buffer zone between the park and the heavily cultivated parts of the district. As a potential tourist attraction the tiger has few equals among animals. And the park as a whole can provide future generations with a view of how their country once looked before the forests were overexploited for timber and overgrazed by livestock and before much of the wildlife fell to the poachers gun. The park can also become a study area unaffected by man's influence where the interrelationships between species and many other ecological problems can be investigated. A national park represents a specialized form of land use in which, ideally, the native flora and fauna are permitted to exist undisturbed by man. This in particular should apply to the predators, which have aroused the antipathy of man for centuries and have as a result been needlessly persecuted on the slightest pretext. Certain management practices in a park are sometimes necessary, and these should of course be based on a thorough study of the situation and be directed at the principal and not the superficial cause of a problem. The evidence presented in this report, for example, indicates that poaching and not tiger predation has been the general cause of the decline of the wildlife in the park. The most effective means of managing the tiger is obviously to manage the prey, which in turn means: (1) curtailing the activity of poachers, and (2) limiting and gradually eliminating all livestock form within the boundaries of the park. Only after these two tasks have been accomplished, and all forms of wildlife haven been substantially increased, will the park

THE N E H R U YEARS

237

be able to fulfil its unique potential as a living museum and natural laboratory. Above all, Kanha Park is part of India's cultural heritage, a heritage in many ways more important than the Taj Mahal and the temples of Khajuraho, because, unlike these structures formed by the hands of man, once destroyed it can never be replaced. G.B. Schaller, The Deer and the Tiger.

Schaller was again using the same example as Jepson had used in the 1930s for a comparison with the Taj Mahal. Thank god that Kanha still remains a jewel of a national park. Schaller's work on the wild tigers of Kanha was remarkable. E.P. Gee reacted in those days to George Schaller's book, The Deer and the Tiger and stated: For the first time on this sub-continent a dedicated scientist has remained almost continually for 14 months in what is possibly the finest remaining habitat for wildlife found in Asia ... Gee had even visited Schaller in the field—he could not believe Schaller's ability to sit long hours waiting for tigers. But there were many Indian forest officers who objected to the American connection and put Schaller through a rough time especially since Gee's review had also stated about Schaller's book: should be read and studied by every forest officer both before and after taking charge of a division. Jealousies arose across the system. At the same time Juan Spillett did a survey of Indian wildlife. Spillet was also an American who went to India in the mid-1960s to do fieldwork. He ended up— within a period of six months—travelling 13,500 miles across India's forests, 300 miles on foot and twentyone days on elephant back. His survey of India's protected areas for the BNHS produced a report. In 1966 the Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society was all about Spillet's surveys. And they had strong policy recommendations. After all, Indira Gandhi had just taken over the realm of power. Spillet stated:

238

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

India has been richly endowed with precious natural resources. Many of these however, already have been destroyed or lost due to ignorance, tradition, apathy or political expediency. On every side the remaining natural resources of this country are confronted with what often appear to be insurmountable barriers. Unless the leaders of India are soon able to implement definitive measures and initiate sound conservation practices, little more than want and poverty and the eventual weakening of this great nation can be expected. He also discussed the abuse of overgrazing across India suggesting that the way things were going all the desirable plants would vanish and in the end all that would be left would be plants animals do not usually eat. On grazing he stated: I am almost invariably told by officials that the problem is realised, but that it is impossible to control grazing by domestic animals in a democracy such as India's. This is faulty reasoning. No government, particularly a democratic one, should permit its people to destroy the nation's most priceless possession—its land. Many feel that in a democracy public property belongs to everyone. But this does not mean that the people are free to destroy the public domain. For example, a public building belongs to everyone just as much as does a reserved forest or a wildlife sanctuary. However, no one is allowed to destroy such buildings or to remove materials from them for private use. He even went on to say: India is basically confronted with two major problems. I firmly believe that if these two were brought under control, the numerous other problems which are presently receiving so much attention and publicity, such as the scarcity of food, lack of foreign exchange, poor living standards, and so forth, would eventually resolve themselves . . . . These two problems are: (1) too many people, and (2) too much domestic livestock. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 36, No. 3 (1966), pp. 616-29.

THE N E H R U YEARS

239

The editor of the BNHS supported his findings and stated: It is not irrelevant to refer to Spillet's conclusion, that it is not only poaching that is the great threat to the continuance of India's wildlife and wild places, but the disastrous effect of over-grazing by domestic livestock all over the country. Understanding a problem clearly is the first requirement toward its solution, and we are grateful to the author of this report for the facts which he has uncovered. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 36, No. 3 (1966), pp. 616-29.

In my opinion both poaching and illegal grazing went hand in hand. The 1990s would reveal the seriousness of Spillet's words. Most social scientists would ignore the problem of grazing even though, I believe, at least 500-600 tigers were poisoned in the 1990s by graziers because they had attacked their livestock. By the late 1960s a bunch of American researchers had focused on India—from Dr S. Dillon Ripley to Schaller, Spillet, Joslin, and Berwick. Now came the moment when rumours flew about researchers being CIA agents spying in India and all kinds of other stuff. I remember Sarah Hardy in Ranthambhore in the late 1970s facing enormous problems on her langur project and finally being forced to leave the country for harassing the monkey God! The 1970s were bad times for the Americans especially after the earlier focus during the 1950s and 1960s by American researchers on India's wilderness. Now came a frozen silence towards them by the government. India was more pro-Soviet than pro-American and many in positions of power tried their level best to attack the American researchers. Also the system in place encouraged jealousies. I remember when I first went to Ranthambhore in 1976 to film wild tigers, the boss of wildlife in Rajasthan made it impossible for me to work. I had to meet the Chief Minister of the state to solve my problems. So god help the 'foreign' scientists of those times! Even today it is a problem for them. Let us look back at this period between 1947-1966 before Indira Gandhi became Prime Minister. The 1960s were the worst time for India's forests and wildlife—this decade revealed the horrors of the 50s as forest after forest got cut down in the name

240

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

of development and Independent India forgot the vital importance of its natural wealth. Shikar agencies mushroomed—every forest officer felt he could only prove himself if he had shot a tiger and the bloodletting reached enormous proportions. It was also nearing the end of the Nehru era and the beginning of Indira Gandhi's—I think this fact was vital for India's forest and wildlife. As much as Nehru remained superficial about the forests and wildlife of India, Indira remained completely knowledgeable— in fact, I believe she h a d her own philosophy about their protection—so as the forests and wildlife of India entered their worst phase the mid-sixties also gave birth to a political leader who in the history of India's wilderness was to be one of its greatest saviours.

A The hunter with his day's bag.

• Killing the symbol of wild India.

The Gandhi Era 1966-1989

B. Seshadri wrote a remarkable piece in 1969 in a book entitled The Twilight Of India's Wildlife. In a way, to me it sums up where India's forests and wildlife were heading without Indira Gandhi's interventions that only started in 1968-9.1 extract from some of his writings. 'Man has lost his capacity to foresee and to forestall. He will end by destroying the earth.' Albert Schweitzer

Has India's wildlife a future? One cannot truthfully say it has, and the reasons have been discussed. One might ask, do these wild animals have to live on? Man in India wants more and more space, the population is increasing at an unprecedented rate, and has he not the right to clear and occupy the forests as he pleases, killing off the wildlife in the process? He certainly has no such right, no claim in the least to apportion to himself all the living-space of so many creatures allotted to them from time immemorial in the natural order of things. What is his right, the right of might and the gun? If progressive thought believes that might without justice is not right, how can such a theory be applied in justification of the slaughter of the animals? Wildlife asks for so little of

242

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

man. It is this which has hit me with the force of a sledgehammer each time I have set foot in a jungle and seen its wild residents. They ask for nothing except to be left alone in the pathetic strips of wild tract that are all that remain of their once populous homes. The animals have their simple rights too on this earth—to exist. In India, much too often there is pious talk of wild animals being in the cultural traditions of the land, as if this in itself will assure their eventual survival. On the other hand, it merely draws attention away from the problem of saving them. All I have said about the animals applies equally well to the country's rich avian and reptilian life. Bird life is superbly rich. Including migrants, over 1,500 species find homes in the subcontinent. But they need trees and bushes, water and marshes, and protection from hunters to survive. Today, the most affected are those limited to specific breeding and feeding grounds through deprivation of their territory. Devoted individuals, and the two premier natural history societies, the Bombay Natural History Society and the Wild Life Preservation Society of India, have worked assiduously for the cause of wildlife conservation, and to persuade the authorities to evolve a policy by which the objects of such conservation can be achieved through sustained implementation of its component stages. But for such efforts, the situation today would be far worse. But in a problem of this nature it is increasingly difficult for single persons or non-official groups to act effectively. No one can now dispute that the wildlife of a country is not one of its most interesting and valuable assets. Sanctuaries where they have been created in India are for the ostensible purpose of conserving the natural fauna and flora in specific and characteristic areas. I say 'ostensible' because there is so little 'following-up' done to ensure they are adequately staffed and managed. There are no experienced naturalists or former hunters of big game on their staffs to advise Forest Departments on wildlife management. Often the men whose supposed task is to look after the wildlife in their restricted areas have very little useful knowledge of their charges. Conservation of wildlife should no longer be thought of, as I am sure it is in many high circles, as a frill, an amenity that ranks low in any

THE G A N D H I ERA

243

realistic scale of values. There are economic arguments for it, in addition to the scientific, the aesthetic, and the moral. It was once the case that wilderness and wildlife did not need human aid to survive. Both would indeed have conserved themselves had they been left alone. This, however, has not been the case. Both have been rendered unstable through man's interference, and therefore now need his aid to continue to exist. The science of ecology has thus assumed great importance in recent years. It is the branch of biology which deals with the habits of organism, their modes of life, and their relations to their surroundings. Wildlife no longer exists in merely physical or climatic environments, but in increasingly complex conditions which involve extended relationships with man. But the utmost care is necessary in all stages of ecological research as applying to the wildlife of India, lest conclusions are hastily drawn and universally applied. For example, I read recently a statement by a scientist working on prey-predator balances that these need to be improved in the sanctuaries. I did not understand it at all. In none of the Indian sanctuaries do predators cause any anxiety either because of their numbers or because of their taking too many prey animals. They are all comparatively slow-breeding, and a spectacular increase in their numbers can be quite ruled out. Neither are the prey animals excessive, and under the present conditions they are unlikely to multiply hugely in the foreseeable future. Denudation of forest grasslands is caused by domestic livestock, not by the wild herbivores. I should have thought that no interference whatever was necessary in the prey-predator relationship, as the sanctuaries are populated by too few of either group, not by too many. In the end, wildlife in India will be conserved only if it is kept on a national footing without reference to politics or political units. Time is not on the side of the animals. Conservation of wildlife should continue to aim primarily at the maintenance of its habitats. All forest, scrub, marsh, and swamp are in charge of government departments, and the saving of adequate areas of these to provide living space for the animals is the responsibility of the State. B. Seshadri, Twilight of India's Wildlife.

244

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

In a way Seshadri was closing the 1960s with a warning about the necessity of prioritizing the wilderness. Indira Gandhi had taken the reigns of power in 1966. Even while Gee, Stracey, and Seshadri wrote she was being groomed as the next prime minister of India. She was to become India's greatest wildlife saviour. Few would have believed it then. We had reached the worst ever crisis concerning forests and wildlife when she took over. Hunting had caused rapid declines in wildlife and forests were being mercilessly slaughtered. Indira Gandhi remained in power till 1984 except for a short gap in between. We shall later examine the impacts of her tenure on wildlife and forests in detail. Let us just have a quick look at what she was managing to do by 1973. By 1968 she had agreed to hold the first IUCN Conference in India and in Delhi. The Conference took place in 1969 in Delhi, brought the crisis in the open, and it was followed by an immediate ban on tiger shooting in India. She enforced the ban, and in 1971 created a task force to draft the Wildlife Protection Act of India, and in 1972 piloted it through Parliament. Soon a census of tigers revealed that there were just about 1800 left. Indira Gandhi spearheaded the birth of Project Tiger. It was clear to me that India had found a Prime Minister to whom wildlife and forests were a priority issue. She also empowered a band of people around her to implement some of her policies. We are going to look at some of these men in those early years of Indira Gandhi's rule. These were the years of serious conservation. To understand a bit of those early years let us look at what one of the band of men, Kailash Sankhala wrote. Sankhala was a forest officer whom Indira Gandhi liked and in the late 1960s he was the director of the Delhi Zoo. In fact his first experience of tigers came through a zoo tiger called Jim. This tiger was a pet in the house of a former hunter, V.C. Shukla whom we talked of earlier. When he joined the Union Cabinet Indira Gandhi was changing the rules and his pet had to be sent to the zoo and Sankhala looked after it. Sankhala was a key participant in the 1969 IUCN Conference. By 1973 he was plucked by Indira Gandhi to be the first director of Project Tiger. She made him a great power of the 1970s. Let us look at how he viewed those years that closed the 1960s.

THE G A N D H I ERA

245

The Skin Trade By Kailash Sankhala The pace of the person-to-person campaign to stop the heavy drain on our leopards and tigers was too slow for me, and I decided to raise the temp. But how? I talked it over with my friend Razia, a charming lady on one of the national newspapers, and we devised a plan. She was to pose as a lady shortly to be married who was to be given a choice fur coat as a present from her brother in England. A photographer would take a picture of her in the coat in order to get it approved by her brother before he bought it. And so we went from shop to shop, taking stock of the pelts and having a perfect excuse to photograph them. One shopkeeper informed us he had a regular supply of 1000 snow leopard skins a year. Another specialized in clouded leopard skins and his annual supply was nearly 2000. Countless leopard skins were neatly piled up in his shop; he said he had nearly 3000 on view and double that number in his warehouse. An interesting piece of information came to light: most of the exports were to East Africa. I could not understand this carrying of coals to Newcastle, for Africa has far more leopards than we have in India. I was told that in Kenya leopard skins could be sold at a much higher price because of the numerous tourists who went there; also, the local traders could obtain a certificate of origin for these imports which came in handy for smuggling Kenyan leopard skins. The illegal killings of Indian leopards were being utilized to legalize the killing of leopards in Kenya. The vicious circle had no end, and the leopards of both countries were losing ground. I counted 22 tiger heads and all seemed to be laughing at us; probably they were mocking at our mission. There were hundreds of tiger rugs, and I pulled out four and spread them out on the floor. The trader immediately offered me a 30 x 40 ft carpet for $10,000. I asked if one was readily available. 'Yes,' said he, 'but you will have to place a firm order as I have to bring it from a palace.' I found a ready excuse to decline the offer. The next shop had just as many skins. 'The fur of cubs is softer,' said the shopkeeper, adding that it required nearly 80 skins of leopard cubs

246

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

to make a coat. After taking photographs of the lady wearing various coats and counting the stock we concluded our investigations. The soft pelts of snow leopards, which the ladies love best and from which the shopkeepers earn a substantial profit, came in a steady flow of 600-800 skins per year in the fashion market. Snow leopards are so rare that even people living in the Himalayan regions hardly ever see them. They live at an altitude of about 12,000 feet where they prey on marmots, musk deer and snow hares. Occasionally they come down to the lower pastures but hardly ever have a chance to attack the sheep of the ever vigilant Gujjars. But some of the graziers, renowned as tough walkers and climbers, who for the six summer months live above 8000 feet, are tempted by the lucrative offers of the valleys. Equipped with firearms and living in rugged mountainous areas where there is little chance of the civil law being enforced, these men become poachers and soon run amok, endangering the whole wildlife of the Himalayas. They chase the snow leopards, leopards, lynx and martens for their pelts and musk deer for their musk pods. Down the valley they go to the emporiums, where they get their loans paid off quickly and even obtain the lure of extra money. The story of the stripped skins is equally pathetic. In the Dehra Dun forests I heard of a tiger held in a snare for two painful days. When the Wildlife Officer came to dispatch the beast it broke its paw and ran off into the jungle to die an agonizing death. Another tiger was stoned to death in the Umariya forests of Madhya Pradesh in 1912. Sometimes villagers trap tigers and invite influential persons to shoot them at a point-blank range. This large-scale poaching, especially by poisoning, has proved fatal to the big cats of India. I put most blame on the traders who purchase the pelts and are quite unconcerned how they were obtained. The price of a tiger skin in the late 1950s was hardly $50; ten years later it had risen to $599. This was too much of a temptation for habitual poachers to resist, particularly when the average annual income of a man working in the forests is less than what he could make by selling one raw uncured tiger skin. The results of my investigation with my lady accomplice were published on the front page of the Indian Express in 1967. It was followed

THE G A N D H I ERA

247

by numerous letters to the Editor and led to questions in Parliament. A ban was immediately imposed on the export of all kinds of spotted skins, and the firms concerned raised a tremendous hue and cry, presenting their pre-ban commitments for not less than 20,000 skins. Many tigers and leopards not yet born were destined to honour these commitments. The case was presented to the Indian Board for Wildlife with a plea to the Grievances Committee of the Government. The Chairman of IBWL, a young and effective minister, Dr. Karan Singh, reacted sharply: 'In that case we have grievances against the Grievances Committee.' The ban on the export of skins was imposed effectively in 1968. Kailash Sankhala, Tiger! The Story of the Indian Tiger.

Indira Gandhi and Dr Karan Singh made Kailash Sankhala a really powerful figure of those times. Sankhala did not like foreigners doing wildlife research in India, but was fully committed to protecting India's wildlife. Like Kailash Sankhala, another forest officer of those times and totally committed to the protection of wildlife was S.P. Shahi. He also records a series of different events during the late 1960s and 1970s that reveal the complexity of those times and the extraordinary role of Indira Gandhi. The estimates committee of the Fourth Lok Sabha (1968-9) states in its seventy-sixth report of March 1969: The Committee regrets to note that an area of about 11 lakh hectares under forests has been lost since 1951 for cultivation and other developmental projects, etc., in the country. No attempts have simultaneously been made to bring an equivalent area under forest as stipulated in the first plan and recommended from time to time by the Central Board of Forestry. The Committee feels very much concerned over these continuous inroads into the forest area which is already below the required proportion laid down in the National Forest Policy. In their opinion, if the trend is allowed to continue unchecked the situation may assume alarming proportions, particularly in the States having a small forest area. Backs to the Wall, S.P. Shahi.

248

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

It was in this same year that the IUCN held its tenth General Assembly in New Delhi. In her inaugural speech Indira Gandhi declared: 'We need foreign exchange, but not at the cost of the life and liberty of some of the most beautiful wildlife habitats of this continent.' Indira Gandhi had also given teeth to the Indian Board of Wildlife and its Chairman, Karan Singh was one of the most dynamic ever to head the board. These are great examples of political will. Dr. Karan Singh said: 'The steady decline in the tiger population of our country has been causing great concern. The Prime Minister has expressed her anxiety over the situation and has suggested a complete moratorium on the killing of tigers for 5 years.' This problem was also subsequently discussed in the executive committee of the Indian Board for Wildlife, and it was decided to recommend that there should be a complete moratorium on the shooting of this beautiful animal with effect from 1 July 1970 for five years so that the declining trend is arrested. Wildlife has come down to us as a priceless heritage and it is out duty to see that it is passed on to posterity enriched. I would, therefore, in my capacity as chairman of the Indian Board for Wildlife strongly urge that you may issue suitable instructions for the implementation of the recommendations of the Indian Board for Wildlife I have quoted above. I shall be glad to know, in due course, of the action taken by your Government in this regard. This was the same Dr Karan Singh who in 1968 as chairman of Indian Board for Wildlife had successfully managed to ban the export of skins. Indira Gandhi's team was wildlife savvy, what luck for India in the nick of time! It was 1970 and according to Shahi few cared for the order, but Indira Gandhi's pressure mounted. One of her typical quotes of those times were: Forestry practices designed to squeeze the last rupee out of our jungles, must be radically oriented at least within our National Parks.

THE G A N D H I ERA

249

Is it beyond our political will and administrative ingenuity to set aside one or two per cent of our forests in their pristine glory for the purpose? By September 1970 the concept of a Wildlife Act was mooted. In an informal meeting of conservationists held by the Prime Minister in September 1970, it was resolved that the Union government should bring forth such a uniform enactment relating to wildlife conservation. Since wildlife was a state subject before such a legislation could be enacted in Parliament the Legislative Assemblies of at least two states must adopt a resolution under Article 252(1) of the Constitution delegating the power of passing such a law to Parliament. On 29 March 1972 Shri F.A. Ahmed, the then Minister of Agriculture, wrote to the Chief Minister of Bihar, Shri Kedar Pande and stated: No nation has such a rich and varied fauna as India and yet of late, the rapid decimation of India's wildlife has few parallels. Areas once teeming with wildlife are quite devoid of them and the few sanctuaries and parks where wildlife now seeks refuge have a tenuous state. Some animals and birds are already extinct and certain others are on the verge of being so . . . . It is therefore imperative that the country should have a uniform Wildlife Conservation and Management Bill which would make provisions for the control of not only hunting but also of trade and traffic in wildlife produce, and for the conservation and management of the wildlife habitats. Indira Gandhi personally pushed the details of this bill through. In her letter of 12 April 1972 addressed to Kedar Pande and several other chief ministers she stated: I have written to you in the past about wildlife conservation and management. Although there is now greater consciousness about this problem than a few years ago, we have not been able to significantly arrest the continuing decline of our fauna, including many endangered species. Poaching is on the increase, and we continue to receive reports of a lucrative trade in the furs and pelts

250

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

of even those animals, like the tiger, whose shooting is in law prohibited throughout the country. Regrettably some State emporia are also involved in this business. My colleague, the Agriculture Minister, has already written to you about the difficulties of controlling trade and taxidermy in the absence of uniform Central law applicable to the entire country. Experts are unanimous that only an integrated and country-wide policy of wildlife conservation and management can arrest the present precipitous decline. I have also received urgent appeals from the World Wildlife Fund. It is for these reasons that we now seek your cooperation to enact Central legislation on wildlife conservation and management. A new Bill incorporating the most recent thinking on wildlife management has been prepared. The Bill also provides specific remedies in the Indian context which will make it possible for the Central and State Governments to deal effectively with the more insidious threats to our fauna. This is not a political issue. It concerns the survival of our famous natural heritage. It is hard to think of an India devoid of its magnificent animals, of the hard-pressed tiger, for instance, going the way of the now extinct Indian Cheetah. Past experience reveals the limitations of the regional approach, with State laws frequently at variance with one another and all the attendant difficulties of implementation. The Centre and the States must now act in concert on the basis of common legislation which should be strictly enforced. I, therefore, request you to get a resolution passed in your Legislature in accordance with Clause 1 of Article 252 of the Constitution as early as possible. This is a typical example of Indira Gandhi battling to save the wildlife of the states—in this case Bihar. It was in the same month that she appointed Dr Karan Singh as Chairman of a Tiger Task Force to create an action plan to save the Indian tiger. Kailash Sankhala was appointed Officer on Special Duty. It was the proposal which was handed to Indira Gandhi in September 1972 that gave birth the following year to Project Tiger.

THE G A N D H I ERA

251

In June 1972 a prominent member of the Congress Legislature Party in Bihar wrote to Indira Gandhi about the tragic release of 100 acres of land from the Madanpur forests. He stated: 'Madanpur forests in my district of Champaran is still rich in wildlife with a concentration of over a dozen tigers. I am distressed to write to you that there are very disquieting reports about releasing forest land to different persons in this forest.' This member asked for help and he got it. On 5 July 1972 his letter was forwarded to the Chief Minister, Kedar Pande with a covering letter from Indira Gandhi that stated: I enclose copy of a letter which I have received regarding the preservation of wildlife in Bihar. You already know of my interest and concern. The Bihar Assembly has not yet passed a Resolution in favour of Central legislation on this subject about which I wrote to you on 12 April 1972.1 hope you will get this expedited. I am disturbed by what the letter says regarding the release of forest land. Please look into this personally and stop it. It is rather significant that this letter was written from Simla at a time when the Prime Minister was having her historic talks with Mr Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Prime Minister of Pakistan. This is a great example of Indira Gandhi's enormous political will in the interest of wildlife. In the middle of the most hectic and historic summit in Simla to take time off to send a chief minister a letter on the Madanpur reserve forest division. Remarkable! S.P. Shahi in the mid 1970s had his own very concerned view on the future of wildlife and its governance. He wrote: Much will also depend on how we go about the business of setting up a suitable administrative machinery for wildlife management in the country. The notion that wildlife should be looked after by an altogether separate service and that the present forestry personnel are ill-equipped for it, has been debated for quite some time. To support this argument, it is often stated the East African countries have different personnel for their reserves and their forests. But few people realize that, in those countries, the wildlife live in open grassy

252

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

savannahs, unlike India where the bulk of wildlife lives in forests. Wildlife and forests have to co-exist in this country. Even if a separate wildlife service is created, I doubt if it will attract men with the necessary aptitude and dedication. As it is, the Indian Forest Service is less glamorous than the other two existing All-India Services. A Wildlife Service will be still less so. The Indian Forest Service was revived so that available talent could be dispersed and in the hope that meritorious youngsters would join this service. But this hope, unfortunately, has been belied. In the seven two-year courses between 1968-70 to 1974-76, out of the 116 persons who were selected for training at the Indian Forest College, Dehra Dun, for the IFS, as many as forty left during the course of the training for other services. Not only that, they left largely for the Indian Administrative and Indian Police Services, a few of them went to the State Bank, and the Central Engineering, Revenue, Indian Ordinance and Railway Services. The situation in the country at present is such that it is not only the salary but the pomp and power that goes with a service that also influences meritorious young men wanting to join it. As long as such a situation exists, the Wildlife Service will continue to be unpopular, and will mostly attract the leftovers. Considering all the pros and cons of the matter, certain guidelines have very recently been issued to the State Governments by the Government of India to establish immediately a separate Wildlife Wing under the overall charge of the Chief Conservator of Forests. An Officer of the rank of Additional Conservator of Forests will head this wing. An officer of the rank of Additional Inspector General of Forests at the Centre is to coordinate and direct the activities of the Wildlife Wings in the various States. It is envisaged that members of the Forest Service trained or experienced in wildlife management will join the new wing without loss of rank. Backs to the Wall, S.P. Shahi.

The Prime Minister approved this proposal for organizing a wildlife wing in the various states in her note dated 18 September 1974:

THE G A N D H I ERA

253

Training the next generation of wildlife managers is crucial. I am not sure whether we have the necessary expertise within the country. We should not hesitate to look abroad for the skills we may need. Possibly UNESCO or UNDP could help in providing a small group of foreign experts to be deployed both at the Forest Research Institute, Dehra Dun, and the Centre to help in training and to keep a watchful eye on our evolving wildlife programme. In order to maintain performance standards, all persons directly or indirectly concerned with wildlife management should be regularly assessed in their annual reports for their performance in wildlife conservation work. The Unit at the Centre will have an important role to play, especially in the early stages. It should be staffed at a high level by specially selected officers, so that it has the means to persuade and assist the States. The 1970s was a really challenging time. Besides the forest officers, there were other key players in the process of conservation. One of these was a remarkable man called M. Krishnan, who was outside of the government but had devoted his entire life to writing about wildlife. In 1970 he wrote one of the few pieces on conservation entitled Animals of the Dwindling Forest. He did not know it then, but over the next two decades he would serve several government committees to save wildlife and secure Project Tiger. I use his piece to start the 1970s. It was written in 1970 and is called Animals of the Dwindling Forest. Over the past 35 years, India's wildlife has dwindled to a mere fraction of its former strength. The decline began much earlier, but was so insidious between 1900 and 1935 that it was hardly noticed even by most of those concerned with the country's wildlife, the officers of various regional forest departments, taxonomists doing stupendous work on the flora and fauna of India, and more experienced hunters interested in the forests and their animals. Broadly speaking, the main factors causing depletion of wildlife in India are: greatly increased demands on the forests by people and governments as a consequence of the great increase in human

254

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

population, the destructive exploitation of natural forests to serve political ends and the recognition of village rights in the forests, sustained and poorly controlled wood and flesh poaching and (to a lesser extent) licenced shooting, and industrialization and its consequences. These factors have become stronger during the past 35 years, and it is in this period that the decline in the country's wildlife has become flagrantly noticeable. Many common species have become locally extinct and a few (the cheetah or hunting leopard is the best known example) extinct altogether in India. Taking 1935 as an arbitrary point of time for comparison, we had roughly 75 million hectares of broadleaved forests then, too, and for obvious reasons they were then much less denuded and even quite primordial in large tracts. How much of the natural tree forest and scrub jungle, swamps and grasslands, valleys and nullahs that we had 35 years ago do we have left now? We do not know, and the official statistics available cannot give us a fair idea of the extent of loss of habitat to the wild animals over these years. Trustworthy faunal statistics are much harder to find than figures for flora. They involve population counts of free-ranging animals, sometimes of shifting populations, and counting gregarious animals in the forests of India is often an impossible undertaking. Further, the rapid diminution of the more exposed communities has to be taken into account. In the early 1940s I would see many herds of blackbuck, some over a hundred strong, around the Tungabhadra Dam (where Mysore and Andhra Pradesh meet in a hydroelectric project); by the 1950s every last little buck in the area had been snared or shot to death by professional meat hunters and amateur 'sportsmen'. Currently, some faunal counts are being made in some sanctuaries: these will yield fairly reliable figures over a course of years. In the past, the only significant counts attempted were limited to important species threatened with extinction, in areas where the animals were localized, such as the lions in the Gir Forest, the great Indian rhinoceros in Assam and north Bengal, and the hardgrounded barasingha in Madhya Pradesh. Doubts have been expressed over some of these figures, but it should be remembered

THE G A N D H I ERA

255

that what a faunal census seeks to achieve is a near approximation to the truth and not mathematical accuracy. In assessing the decline of India's fauna, it is customary to list the species which are on the brink of extinction or quite extinct in the country, such as the cheetah, the pygmy hog, the hispid hare, the two lesser species of Asiatic rhinoceros, the pink-headed duck, Jerdon's courser, and the great Indian bustard. A better and more indicative way would be to point out that in most places where familiar creatures till recently, even common animals have become locally extinct or else quite rare. The animals of the open plains, being most open to dispossession and harassment by humanity, have fared much worse than the animals of the hills. The plains forests have virtually disappeared in the south, and in many parts of the north, and the denuded land has been occupied, cut up, and otherwise exploited by men to such an extent that in most areas the animals have vanished. Typical of the plains country is the blackbuck, exclusively Indian, arrestingly beautiful, and fastest long-distance runner on earth. A hundred years ago, it roamed the plains in vast herds, and was the commonest wild animal of the country even around towns and cantonments; 35 years ago, it was still to be found in its old haunts, but in sadly depleted number; today it is locally extinct over most of the country, and survives in small herds in a few areas. The blackbuck is the best example of an Indian animal whose decline is due entirely to hunting. Even after men crowded the plains country, it was there in large numbers, but the nets and snares (some of them horribly cruel) of the professional meat hunters and the rifle of the 'sportsmen' finished it off in most places. The wolf, a plains animal in the peninsula, is now extinct in the south and rare even in the north. Other animals of the scrub jungles and open forest, common till recently and now uncommon or rare, are the chinkara, the nilgai (extinct in the south) and the dinky little Indian fox; among birds, the Great Indian Bustard and florican may be mentioned. The seasonal slaughter of waterbirds at large waters where they assemble in great numbers, as at Chilka Lake in Orissa and Tada in Andhra Pradesh, goes on unchecked. Migratory duck

256

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and geese, resident duck, flamingos, herons, even pelicans, are killed for the table. Among the animals of the tree forests and the hills, the dramatic decline of the tiger in the past five or six years has attracted the most attention. It is true that the poisoning of cattle kills by villagers has accounted for quite a few tigers, but it is the hunter's rifle that has been the main cause for the decline of this grandest of all cats, so long and intimately associated with India. Till very recently, tigers were regularly shot all over India, by licenced and unlicenced hunters—except for a negligible percentage, there was not even the excuse for their destruction that they were man-eaters or confirmed cattle-lifters. In Mysore, Hyderabad and elsewhere in Andhra Pradesh, all over Orissa, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh, tigers were shot for 'sport'—in the Kanha National Park of MP there is a tree from which dozens of tigers have been shot on licence. Being a slow breeder, the tiger has not been able to cope with such sustained shooting down. In my opinion, the leopard is also on the decline, for the same reason. Other forest animals which are now uncommon in their old haunts are the sloth bear (so peculiarly the bear of India), locally extinct in many areas where it was common a generation ago, the fishing cat and the rusty-spotted cat over their somewhat limited ranges, gaur in some of their long-held homes, the hard-ground subspecies of the barasingha in Madhya Pradesh, the lion-tailed macaque of the southern hill forests and the Nilgiri tahr in places. Himalayan and sub-Himalayan animals, with an entity of their own, are not specifically mentioned here. I believe it is in sincere ignorance of the permanent damage they are doing to the country's wildlife that the ministers and other elected authorities in many of our States are so willing to placate the 'landless poor' (whatever that means—I find it difficult to imagine the 'landed poor' from whom they are obviously distinguished) by ceding rights, privileges, and even territory inside the reserved forests and sanctuaries to them. The second highly relevant factor is that as the Constitution of India stands each State has sovereign rights over

THE G A N D H I ERA

257

forests, and the Centre cannot prevail upon to adopt a more conservationist attitude towards its wildlife. The setting up of hydroelectric and other national projects inside a sanctuary (as in Uttar Pradesh, where the Ramganga project will drown the best developed area of the Corbett National Park) or on its borders (like the Moyar project which adjoins the Mudumalai and Bandipur sanctuaries) leads to tremendous devastation of the natural forests and, by opening up the cover with clearings and roads, renders the animals accessible to poaching and constant disturbance. Industrial plants and projects in or around a preserve have much the same effect: the dangers of population that they bring in have not yet been studied in India. The position, as outlined, might seem pretty bleak, but is far from hopeless. What gives one hope is the wonderful innate richness of the country's wildlife and the fact that we have achieved real feats of wildlife conservation in the recent past. Making every allowance for the decline set out above, the fact remains that even today India is in its flora and fauna one of the richest countries of the world. And although exotic plants have invaded, and been nurtured in the land to the detriment of its wildlife, we have not made the mistake that other countries have of introducing exotic animal species into India. Compare India's faunal integrity with that of Australia, where the English rabbit, the Asiatic camel and the domesticated Indian water-buffalo have run wild and are major threats to life and wildlife, or with that of England which is the only place on earth where the Indian and Chinese muntjacs interbreed in the wild. Consider, besides, the taxonomic richness and highly individual character of India's fauna. We have more cats (taking the lesser and greater cats together) than any country in the world, and more species of deer; further, quite a few animals with a distribution over Southeast Asia attain their best development here, such as the sambar, the gaur, and the elephant {Elephas maximus)-, furthermore, we have a number of animals that are peculiarly our own, such as the bonnet monkey and the lion-tailed monkey, the black langur, the Nilgiri tahr, both subspecies of the swamp deer or barasingha, the cheetal, the blackbuck, the chowsingha or four-horned antelope, the nilgai,

258

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and the sloth bear (the sloth bear of Ceylon is taxonomically assigned to a subspecies). The feats of preservation referred to are the saving of the Asiatic lion in the Gir Forest of Gujarat, and the great Indian rhinoceros in Assam and north Bengal. The Asiatic lion is the lion of the Bible and of Omar Khayyam, and had a wide range over Persia and neighbouring countries, and north India; it was saved only in the Gir Forest, thanks to the conservationist wisdom and zeal of princes, and the subsequent efforts of the State Government. The saving of the rhino in Assam in the face of heavy odds was an even greater achievement, but the story is so well known that it need not be told here. The growing interest of foreign and international bodies in India's wildlife might help, but not very much, I think, considering that the ultimate fate of our wildlife is in the hands of diverse and changing administrations. But if we can somehow tighten up protection and prevent further depletion for a decade or so, I believe public interest and pride in the country's wildlife will develop sufficiently to assure its future. The next ten years, I think, will decide the future of India's wildlife. M. Krishnan, (ed.), Animals of Dwindling Forest.

Like M. Krishnan, another great character of those times who also worked out of the system was Billy Arjan Singh, and both Krishnan and Arjan Singh were really respected by Indira Gandhi. I think she found Billy more fascinating and wilder in his ways. Billy lived in the wilderness of Dudhwa on the India-Nepal border and was obsessed with tigers. Indira Gandhi gave him her full support. Like Kailash Sankhala, S.P. Shahi, and M. Krishnan, Billy was a part of the band of committed protectors of wildlife, and in different ways they all drew their powers from a close association with Indira Gandhi. It was Indira Gandhi who made Billy famous in the late 1970s by permitting him to import a captive tigress f r o m Europe to reintroduce in the wilds of D u d h w a . She supported Billy's view of experimentation in this sector, something that would be unheard of today. Billy is a great battler in his efforts to save both forests and wildlife. In his eighties, he continues his

THE G A N D H I ERA

259

work in Dudhwa and is a pillar of strength for all conservationists. I quote something he wrote in the 1970s: Who is to blame for the cattle in the forest? Whether it is the politician or the bureaucrat—I still blame the bureaucrat for being half a politician—it is a crisis of character which knows no other master than expediency. The same principle operates when it comes to protecting the animals from hunting. The various laws banning tiger-shooting, the export of skins and so on, have been useful but collectively they may add up to a classic case of 'too little and too late'. In my own state shooting is still uncontrolled outside the forest; anyone can fire at wildlife in the fields, and though it may be technically illegal to shoot a tiger, in practice any number of excuses of the 'crop problem' and 'defence of property' variety can be invoked to absolve the individual of his crime. A Bill to correct this situation has been waiting for approval since 1966 but due to changes of government, lack of interest and political pressure from the agricultural lobby which has little sympathy for preserving anything which might damage the farmer's livelihood, however marginally, it still has not reached the statute book. The Bill would make it compulsory to report every kill outside the forest, and carcass would then become the property of the state. Of course like many other laws it would probably not be strictly enforced, but at least it would give conservationists a much-needed weapon to deal with offenders. Whether it will ever come to law is another matter. Similarly, the skin trade continues to flourish despite the official ban. The headquarters of the trade are in New Market in Calcutta, and shortly after the ban had been imposed I went there to see what effect it had had. At one time the turnover had been exceptionally heavy, both in raw hides collected by agents working round the country and in cured and mounted skins ready to be shipped abroad. These lucrative days were now over, I was told. One shopkeeper informed me regretfully that he had been able to handle only 200 skins a month since the ban compared to a thousand or so before. Nevertheless the trade continues and even the local customs are not

260

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

averse to abetting a limited traffic. During a short tour of the dealers in the market I was shown one collection of thirty leopard skins and variously offered a monthly supply of fifty uncured tiger pelts at around three thousand rupees apiece, and two hundred leopard skins at a little over a thousand rupees each. There was also a plentiful supply of monitor lizards, crocodiles and pythons, and whole range of finished products openly displayed including tigers, clouded leopards and pandas. This trade takes place under the shadow of the monumental edifice which houses the Forest Department of Bengal. Just across the road is the animal market, known for many years to both residents and visitors to Calcutta as the place where you can purchase almost any form of Indian wildlife. It is a dark, dirty building with animals and birds of every description packed into overcrowded cages. The smell is sickening and after a morning spent visiting this wildlife ghetto and skin market nearby, one begins to understand why so many of our beautiful forests are becoming silent and deserted. Of course the obvious way of dealing with these commercial operations would be to enforce the existing laws more efficiently. Perhaps some method could be found of accurately branding all skins and then declaring that any presented for sale after a particular date would be illegal; severe penalties could then be imposed on those caught flouting the law. After all, if the desecrators of the Taj Mahal can be put behind bars, why should the skin merchants, who trade in the fur of rare animals, go free? We have our engineers, but no alchemists. Simple though it may appear, I think such action is too much to hope for. The law is too weak, vested interests are too strong, and there is always someone around to point out that human considerations must come first; in this scheme of things conservationists do well if they are merely relegated to a class of amiable eccentrics. The only chance of saving our wildlife is to adopt a completely new approach to the problem; new, at least, as far as India is concerned. We must realize that in the survival of the animals lies an outstanding financial investment which can be exploited by developing the tourist industry. Kenya's second largest asset is her

THE G A N D H I ERA

261

wildlife while India, with potential resources not much inferior to the African veldt, earns practically nothing from them. With no commercial justification for their continued existence, the animals are killed, and as they disappear, so too does the rich financial dividend they would have paid in the future. Once we have become aware of this undiscovered gold mine we must establish a national service for wildlife which will coordinate the planning of parks and sanctuaries throughout the country. At a local level responsibility for the animals must be taken away from the forest departments and given to a separate body; in this way wildlife will receive the attention it deserved and not be dismissed, as it is now, as a tiresome pest. I think we will also have to accept that there is no longer any point in trying to protect every animal in the land; the idea that the cattle could be excluded from all the remaining forests along with the timber merchants and other contractors is nothing more than a fantasy. Instead we should concentrate on building up a few areas reserved entirely for wildlife. There should be more land made available for sanctuaries and it should be divided up into larger and more viable units. The total area of all reserves in India today amounts to 4200 square miles; in the Tanzania the Serengeti Park alone is 5700 square miles. Compare this to the Maldhan sanctuary in northern India which is precisely four square miles. Such places give absolutely no protection to the animals and are created merely to pay lip service to the idea of wildlife preservation. In my view a sanctuary must be at least 100 square miles; anything smaller should be abandoned, for as long as we persist with places like Maldhan we cannot be said to be taking the survival of our animals seriously. Most important of all, sanctuaries will have to be properly protected. That means ending all forestry operations inside them and excluding everyone, from the graziers to the honey collectors. The importance of removing the cattle cannot be exaggerated; until this is done no amount of panning will save the animals. As I have already mentioned deer are always driven out by livestock and often catch their diseases. The gaur of Madumalai and Bandipur were completely destroyed a short while ago by an infection transmitted

262

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

by domestic animals. Africa has a safety valve in the tsetse fly which carries a sleeping sickness fatal to cattle but harmless to wildlife. India has nothing comparable and the only solution is total segregation. When the borders of our sanctuaries are sealed the animals will at last be secure. In some places, of course, a whole species may have disappeared and then they will have to be replaced either with animals bred in captivity or from another well-stocked area. As we have seen it is not easy to return captive predators like the tiger and the leopard to the wild because they have lost their ability to kill and their fear of humans; nevertheless it will have to be attempted, otherwise many of our sanctuaries will be protecting nothing more imposing than the mongoose. All these proposals may sound and turn out to be no more than quixotic daydreams in the context of what is happening in India today. Yet I believe that they represent the only hope of saving our wildlife. The cheetah has already been lost, and many other animals, as we have seen, are in grave danger. The erotic sculptures of Khajuraho and Konark are carefully preserved as part of our cultural heritage, yet the tiger, which is our outstanding heritage, graces the showcases and walls of tycoons thousands of miles away. We are exchanging our birthright for foreign gold and when the inheritance is gone no hand of man can bring back the vanished herds galloping across the plains or revive the resonant roll of the tiger's roar which echoes through the forest. Much has been destroyed already; this is our last chance to save what remains. Threefold the stride ofTime, from first to last! Loitering slow, the Future creepeth, Arrow-swift, the Present sweepeth, And motionless forever stands the Past. Schiller Billy Arjan Singh, Tiger Haven.

Billy is one of the greatest spokespersons for an Indian Wildlife Service. In 1979 he articulated his views eloquently for the

THE G A N D H I ERA

263

government in a note. Most of the Indian Forest Service did not agree with him but I think he came very close to persuading Indira Gandhi to create such a service. Looking back, it is really sad that it did not happen. The year 1969 was a vital year in the history of India's forests and wildlife. Indira Gandhi had come to power in 1966 and in 1967 to 1968 she had just started restructuring all the policymaking bodies involved with forests and wildlife. She had early associations with wildlife. She was once the President of the Delhi Bird Watchers Society and had also loved the wildlife of Africa when she had toured Kenya as a young member of Parliament. She came to the job of prime minister with a love for the wilderness. This fact is very clear. Till 1968 hunting was rampant, there was a flourishing trade in skins, and there were very few laws to check the sad state of affairs. On 8 July 1969 Indira Gandhi made a pertinent address to the Indian Board of Wildlife—gone were the superficial comments made at such meetings—gone was the lack of priority attached to such meetings as was the case in the Nehru era. Indira Gandhi had made the young and dynamic minister of tourism, Dr Karan Singh, the chairman of the Indian Board for Wildlife in 1968, and the meetings were suddenly all important. I reproduce her inaugural address to the 8 July meeting which reveals Indira Gandhi's depth and understanding of detail on this issue in the first years of her prime ministership. Inaugurating the Session of the Board, the prime minister said: 'I am happy to have this occasion of saying a few words to this reconstituted Board for Wildlife. I am here not as Prime Minister but as one who loves nature and feels the deep concern for the manner in which it is being gradually destroyed, not intentionally but through, perhaps, lack of knowledge on the part of public and people who live around. Forests and wildlife that exist in them are not only beautiful to see but they are also of great value to us in a variety of ways. In some countries, there is a debate going on as to what effect the extinction of certain species of birds or insects is having on the human beings, on crops and on many other parts of our daily life. As Jagjivan Ram/7

264

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

has said India is indeed fortunate in having a great variety of plants, trees and animals. This should have been a source of pride and joy to us. But, unfortunately, there is hardly any appreciation of this bounty and beauty. We should aim at conserving what is available to us and, if possible, to add to it, so that the coming generations do not have less but more. The two great enemies of wildlife, or amongst the enemies of wildlife, are economic progress and, perhaps, greed. Also, of course, ignorance and insensitivity. But if progress is well planned, there need not be a danger to wildlife or natural beauty. Sometimes our engineers or administrators or dam builders do not have any reverence for nature. I entirely agree that if it is a question of needs of men, we cannot sacrifice people to animals, however, beautiful or useful. But I do not think there need be this conflict. Whenever dams and projects are located in the midst of forests, care should be taken to make provision for the planting of trees in such a way that the animal life can be rehabilitated in other parts. Similarly, schemes of afforestation can be such as would give livelihood to the people who live there without necessarily conflicting with the animal life. We all know how the cutting down of forests has affected the climate of places. I am told that the landslides, which we are now having in the Darjeeling area, are partly due to this cutting down of trees. It is naturally important that not only engineers and administrators but all of us should be given special instructions regarding the wildlife preservation and conservation of trees and plants. I would like to see that the State Governments are urged to set up bird sanctuaries and wildlife parks near some of the new dams and reservoirs. I hope that high priority will be given to this and that the State Governments will seek the advice of wildlife experts. Of course, it is not quite enough to designate some areas as national parks and sanctuaries. We should ensure that they are really sanctuaries. I must confess that I have not seen all our national parks but I do not know if they are run as well as they ought to be. I have seen several of the game sanctuaries in Africa. The atmosphere there is entirely different to what we find in India. The first thing you notice when you happen to be there is that the wardens have the

THE G A N D H I ERA

265

genuine love for animals. They know the individual animals. They can recognize by their pug marks. The whole atmosphere is one of convenience of the animals first and of the tourist and of the human being second. Although cars are allowed on various roads, they are not allowed to blow horns or to do anything that might disturb the normal routine of the animals or to frighten them in any way and that is important if the parks are to continue to be natural and not have a kind of atmosphere of a zoo. In order to preserve wild game one has also to preserve smaller animals that have grown in the forests because it is on the smaller animals that the larger animals live. Tigers and leopards are big animals who, when they cannot pursue their normal hunting habits, start attacking domestic cattle and perhaps become man-eaters. I made some reference earlier to greed as one of the enemies of the wildlife. Now we all know that in the last century many countries have suffered because of the impatience of those who traded in animal skins, furs, and so on. Even the need for foreign exchange does not justify the killing of tigers and leopards and other such valuable animals in a manner that become extinct. A few months ago I received a cable from the International Conference on Game Conservation and Wildlife Management on this subject and I believe that this is one of the items on your agenda. Last March I was very sorry to read about the devastating fire in Corbett Park. A place cannot be called a national park if lorries and jeeps are running around and timbermen and traders are swarming and disturbing the life there. The new Chairman of the Board also happens to be our Minister of Tourism and I hope that this coincidence will lead to greater tourist facilities in our national parks and sanctuaries, but as I have said, without disturbing animals. If I may give personal experience in one of the parks in Uganda. They have built very small cottages. From outside they look like mud huts. I do not know what they are really made of. Very early in the morning I heard a noise outside my door. I thought that somebody is disturbing me with morning tea though I do not take it and I was prepared to go out and shout at the person for waking

266

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

me up early. But when I looked out I saw a lot of small animals who had come to lick something that was put near about. In the predawn light they were playing perfectly free from all fear of human and other people and it was really one of the most unforgettable sights. This is an atmosphere which we should try to build up in our own parks. I have been pained to see many of our archaeological centres. The Department ofTourism has put up buildings which are entirely out of keeping with the spirit and atmosphere of the place and often these buildings jar with the existing archaeological or natural beauty. We need a new approach to tourist architecture, both at archaeological sites and in national parks. Tourist buildings should certainly give all modern amenities, but they should blend also with their surroundings. Sometimes I have been grieved to receive complaints that even forest officials and district officers have turned poachers. I do not know whether there is any truth in it, but it certainly deserves to be fully investigated. I find you have proposal for an All-India Wildlife Service and for the training of guides. There is certainly need for guides who are well trained in the art and science of preserving wildlife and who will be able to indicate their love for animals and their enthusiasm to the public. Jagjivan Ram/7 has rightly referred to education in schools on this subject. I hope that close coordination will be kept with the Department of Education in various States to see that while we do not want it to be a separate subject but somehow it should come in the language lessons or in some other context. It is very important that our children should know to recognize our birds and animals and plants and should know their value. Wildlife specialists must think not only of animals, but also of trees. I was happy to see during my recent visit to Afghanistan that some of the young people, who are required to do national service there, are banded together in what they call a 'Green Corps' and are put to work to plant trees on barren hill slopes and elsewhere. Here

THE G A N D H I ERA

267

is an activity that might interest young people and which also augment national wealth. The task of this Board is not going to be easy. I think we are all aware of the many difficulties which come sometimes from the State Governments, sometimes from the very genuine problems of the people who live in the area, and many other conflicting interests. But we have somehow to project the view that this is also an interest, something which is of value in our national life and must be kept in view, no matter what other programme is being thought of or implemented. So, I would like to give my good wishes for your deliberations and I hope that this Board will not be merely a committee which meets when called, but will be a group of people who will be ever vigilant in the cause of our beautiful and free-moving fellow citizens, namely our wild animals and birds. I have great pleasure in inaugurating this conference and I do hope that you will be far more active and will meet more regularly than was the case earlier.' Then came Dr Karan Singh's articulation—strong and impressive: 'Madam Prime Minister, Shri Jagjivan Ranyz and friends, Although I have lived most of my life amidst forests and mountains, I am by no means an expert on wildlife and, therefore, I decline to make a long and detailed presidential address. I am very glad, Madam, that you have in your speech covered almost all the basic points that needed to be said on this occasion. I will only, if I may, add one or two points for emphasis. I feel that the term 'wildlife' itself is something of a misnomer, because what we are concerned with is the total natural environment, which includes forests, various species offloraand fauna and so on, and it is this natural environment that has always been and remains the ultimate foundation of human civilisation. Despite the progress of science and technology we are still ultimately dependent upon Nature. In fact, the developments have created certain new problems that threaten the very existence of this natural environment and have thrown out of gear the delicate balance of Nature.

268

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

As you rightly said, Madam, our generation holds our national wealth in trust for posterity. We have no right whatsoever to ruthlessly exploit these natural resources for immediate gain and profit, because we have got to pass these on to generations which will follow us, not merely intact but, if possible, in a better state than what they are today. For example, Madam, you mentioned the question of skins. Certainly if we kill off all tigers and panthers for their skins it will bring in a lot of foreign exchange in one year, but the depredation that we will be doing to our own nation will be terrible, and criminal. In fact, I was distressed to read a note whereby two thousand tigers and leopard skins are going to be exported.' I think at this moment of time Karan Singh's role was really important. He was the maharaja of Kashmir and against hunting. Most of the other Maharaja's had enormous records to their name. The Maharaja of Surguja had killed 1100 tigers by then. Cleverly, Indira Gandhi empowered Karan Singh to protect and neutralize some of the hunting lobbies of the royals in India. We will see later that they both succeeded. At the 1969 IUCN Congress later that year, Indira Gandhi gave another hard hitting speech on saving India's wildlife: 'I am delighted that the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources is holding its General Assembly in our country. May I extend a warm welcome to all the delegates on behalf of the Government and the people of India. I have special pleasure in coming to your Conference for, if I may strike a personal note, as an only child whose childhood was invaded by the turbulence of a vast national upheaval, I found companionship and an inner peace in communion with Nature. I grew up with love for stones, no less than trees, and for animals of all kinds. I have always felt that closeness to Nature helps to make one a more integrated personality. I say this especially because of the general lack of concern or feeling for these things nowadays, at least in my country. India is country in the throes of change. And to be a conservative is not popular. Nor am I one, for, our conditions demand that we

r THE G A N D H I ERA

269

speed the process of social and economic transformation. Yet, there are some things which I would not like to change—which I would like to conserve—our beautiful craft, the rural folk's instinctive feel for line and design and, of course, the natural beauty of our wildlife, our forests and our mountains. This is not merely for one's aesthetic sense, though that is important enough, but also for our future wellbeing. As one looks around at the Universe, one marvels at the order and the balance. How beautifully everything fits in. How remarkably well everything is organized. All creatures must struggle against Nature to survive, and each species has equipped itself in some special way for self-preservation. Man developed his brain and today has transcended the limits of sound and space. He is the professor of undreamt knowledge and power. In the struggle for survival, he has gained the upper hand. One should have thought that, with this knowledge at his command, man would have learnt to live at peace with himself and with Nature. Yet, no matter where one goes, one sees the needless and wasteful destruction of plant and animal life for the sake of a moment's pleasure or a temporary gain, with no heed to the balance of Nature or the disturbance of its serenity. It is a sad commentary on our attitude towards Nature that we still talk of'exploiting' its resources. This is an unpleasant word, for it implies taking an unjust advantage. Instead, we should think of the 'development' of resources, of using resources with care. We all work for progress, but progress has its ugly side also. The steady growth of population and the economic needs which it imposes, have gradually encroached upon forest resources. Mankind looks at animals, at flora and fauna, for what it can get out of them. In the last century, and especially during the last three or four decades, India has been denuded of her forest wealth. The wanton felling of trees has changed the landscape, affecting climate. Deforestation is creating a major problem of soil erosion. A massive campaign is necessary now to educate our people in the first principles of natural conservation. We must teach them, from their

270

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

early school days, to become planters and protectors of trees and to care for animals. When forests are cut down, wildlife is naturally threatened. Some beautiful and interesting species have become extinct. At the rate at which secret poaching and shooting are taking place, the rhinoceros, the famous Bengal tiger, and even the elephant might disappear unless we take vigilant and drastic steps to preserve them. Fortunately, we have an enlightened forest service but its strength is not adequate to the size of our country. Thanks to pioneers, who were impelled by a missionary zeal, we have set up several parks and wildlife sanctuaries. We have a Wildlife Board, which has placed a ban on the export of the skins of tigers and leopards. We do need foreign exchange, but not at the cost of the life and liberty of some of the most beautiful inhabitants of this continent. Science is enabling us to find new sources for the fulfilment of our needs. But the world's population and its wants are growing so fast that we must evolve a more rational system of use and conservation of natural resources everywhere. In a scramble for exports, we in India cannot expose our iron ore and coal reserves to ruin. Nor should countries who import these minerals from us want us to exhaust our reserves. There should be far greater international research and cooperative action on the conservation of the world's mineral resources. We should learn to base our policies now on a long-term vision rather than on considerations of immediate economic gain. The natural resources of the world are truly international in character. They are the common trust of mankind. Your Union is endeavouring to arouse the conscience of governments in regard to their responsibility to conserve the world's resources. International scientific and technological cooperation has already done much to develop human resources. It has an equally important part to play in the conservation of natural resources. All countries should encourage the interflow of scientific information and the exchange of experts, instructors and scholars in order to promote knowledge and techniques of conservation. Some day we might work towards the adoption of a universal declaration on the principles underlying the rational use and protection of natural

THE G A N D H I ERA

271

resources. In the meantime, we must endeavour to educate governments and peoples.' If only she knew then that because of enormous Japanese demand places like Kudremukh would be mined and scarred for life as rain forest was destroyed to mine for iron ore, and questionable leases in the late 1990s got repeated and renewed. And all this was taking place in the middle of a National Park. From 1969 onwards, whether it was the ban on tiger shooting in 1970, the creation of a tiger task force, the legislation of the Wildlife Protection Act in 1972, and then the launch of Project Tiger in 1973, Indira Gandhi's words, decisions, and attitude towards Forest India and all its denizens was strong and clear— save them and do it fast. I extract bits of what she said to the National Committee on Environmental Planning and Coordination in April 1972: As one who has been deeply interested in this subject since long before I had ever heard of the word ecology, I am naturally glad that people have woken up to the dangers which threaten the world as we know it. Since man first discovered that he could use nature for his own purposes he has been interfering with his environment. Man is a part of nature and only one of the many species who inhabit the earth. But he has treated it as his colony to exploit it. The scale of his intervention has now grown to a point where it has produced vast and disruptive changes which have already modified our existence more profoundly than any earlier human activity. Hence, the ecological problems with which we are now concerned embrace diverse aspects ranging from the economic, social, psychological problems of human settlements to the management and use of natural resources and the conservation of natural habitats. The earlier attitude of scorn has changed but some people still regard conservation and concern for ecology as something of a fad. Why worry if few tigers and rhinos and a few plant species are wiped out? Your agenda paper gives the answer. An environment in which animals andplants become extinct is not safe for the human being either.

272

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Our attention cannot be diverted from the main question before us which is to bring basic amenities within the reach of our people and to give them better living conditions without alienating them from nature and their environment, without despoiling nature of its beauty and of the freshness and purity so essential to our lives.' In June 1972 at the United Nations Conference on H u m a n Environment in Stockholm she stated: 'I have had the good fortune of growing up with a sense of kinship with nature in all its manifestations. Birds, plants, stones were companions and, sleeping under the star-strewn sky, I became familiar with the names and movements of the constellations. But my deep interest in this our 'only earth' was not for itself but as a fit home for man. One cannot be truly human and civilized unless one looks upon not only all fellow men but all creation with the eyes of a friend. Throughout India, edicts carved on rocks and iron pillars are reminders that 22 centuries ago Emperor Ashoka defined a king's duty as not merely to protect citizens and punish wrongdoers but also to preserve animal life and forest trees. Ashoka was the first and perhaps the only monarch until very recently, to forbid the killing of a large number of species of animals for sport or food, foreshadowing some of the concerns of this Conference. He went further, regretting the carnage of his military conquests and enjoining upon his successors to find "their only pleasure in the peace that comes through righteousness". Along with the rest of mankind, we in India—in spite of Ashoka—have been guilty of wanton disregard for sources of our sustenance. We share your concern at the rapid deterioration of flora and fauna. Some of our own wildlife has been wiped out, miles of forests with beautiful old trees, mute witnesses of history, have been destroyed. Even though our industrial development is in its infancy, and at its most difficult stage, we are taking various steps to deal with incipient environmental imbalances. For instance, unless we are in a position to provide employment and purchasing power for the daily necessities of the tribal people

THE G A N D H I ERA

273

and those who live in or around our jungles, we cannot prevent them from combing the forest for food and livelihood; from poaching and from despoiling the vegetation. When they themselves feel deprived, how can we urge the preservation of animals? How can we speak to those who live in villages and in slums about keeping the oceans, the rivers and the air clean when their own lives are contaminated at the source? The environment cannot be improved in conditions of poverty. Nor can poverty be eradicated without the use of science and technology. It has been my experience that people who are at cross purposes with nature are cynical about mankind and ill at ease with themselves. Modern man must re-establish an unbroken link with nature and with life. He must again learn to invoke the energy of growing things and to recognize, as did the ancients in India centuries ago, that one can take from the earth and the atmosphere only so much as one puts back into them. In their hymn to Earth, the sages of the Atbarva Veda chanted, I quote: "What of thee I dig out, let that quickly grow over, Let me not hit thy vitals, or thy heart. So can man himself be vital and of good heart and conscious of his responsibility".' By March 1973 Indira Gandhi was delighted at the launch of Project Tiger. In fact it was her political will over the previous five years that had finally led to Project Tiger. In her strong message she stated: 'Project Tiger abounds in irony. The country that has for millennia been the most famous haunt of this great animal now finds itself struggling to save it from extinction. The Project is comment on our long neglect of our environment as well as our new-found, but most welcome, concern for saving one of nature's most magnificent endowments for posterity. But the tiger cannot be preserved in isolation. It is at the apex of a large and complex biotope. Its habitat, threatened by human intrusion, commercial forestry, and cattle grazing must first be made inviolate. Forestry practices, designed to squeeze the last rupee out of our jungles, must be radically reoriented at least within our National Parks and Sanctuaries, and pre-eminently in the Tiger

274

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Reserves. The narrow outlook of the accountant must give way to a wider vision of the recreational, educational, and ecological value of totally undisturbed areas of wilderness. Is it beyond our political will and administrative ingenuity to set aside about one or two per cent of our forests in their pristine glory for this purpose? Project Tiger is a truly national endeavour. It can succeed only with the full cooperation of the Central and State Governments and the support of the people. It has my very best wishes.' At the Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs, Indira Gandhi struck a vital note at its conclusion. This was January 1976 in Madras and it was about 'consumption'—which is what in 2002 wipes out more forests each year than anything else. She stated: ... living in the open, living in our own country, needs quite a different type of consumption, or rather lack of consumption, than perhaps people living in colder climates and in more sophisticated societies can realize. This is the problem before India. We do not want to raise our consumption except of course for those who lack their basic needs. They must be given their basic requirements of education, of development but beyond that I think that we have to find a level and say "Thus far and no further". I do -not know whether this will be possible surrounded as we are by the acquisitive societies and ideals.' She was right. It was not possible. In fact, one of her close political associates who led the country in 1991—Narsimha Rao—brought consumptive practices in India to its peak by creating new economic policies. This immediately led to devastation in Forest India. By the end of 1976, Indira Gandhi had put forest and wildlife on the concurrent list of the constitution so that the Central government could play a more active role in preservation. And it was vital because the Constitution of India, adopted in 1950, did not have any specific provision relating to the protection of the environment or the conservation of nature. Indira Gandhi realized this problem and quickly rectified it.

THE G A N D H I ERA

275

The forty-second amendment to the Constitution would play a critical role in the decades ahead to provide enormous legal relief to our beleaguered wildlife. For the first time, a specific provision was made to protect and improve the environment and both the state and its citizens were put under the fundamental obligation to do so. The environment includes forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife. On the 3 January 1977 Indira Gandhi addressed the Indian Science Congress at Bhubaneshwar in Orissa and stated of trees and forests: 'That is why we welcome and fully support the decisions of our young people to take up tree planting as a major activity. I hope that older people will also participate wholeheartedly. Every standing tree is an ovation to life. It is the symbol and evidence of the earth's fruitfulness and capacity for regeneration. We need to involve forestry experts, landscape architects and arboriculturists with the popular movement. But the major responsibility will continue to rest on foresters. Great foresters have been great conservationists. Unfortunately in the name of contributing to revenues, some of our forest departments are more active in felling than in planting trees. And even the planting which is done is of fast-growing trees, whether or not they are suitable to a region.' Between 1977 and 1979, Indira Gandhi lost power to a united Opposition and her focus and passion-driven concern for forests and wildlife which drove so many decisions only came back on her return to power late in 1979. But even in this gap Morarji Desai, the new prime minister from the Opposition party, was forced to continue her policies. He stopped the trade in rhesus monkeys in 1978 and tried to mount a rescue operation for three crocodilian species. Let us not forget that from 1947 to 1977 two million rhesus monkeys had been exported for foreign exchange. Morarji Desai had to follow the law that Indira Gandhi made, that is, The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. By 1979, on her return to power, there was much debate about restructuring the forest and wildlife departments which thus far

276

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

had been housed in the Ministry of Agriculture. It was the beginning of the 1980s and I let some of Indira Gandhi's speeches and decisions speak for this decade. This was the time when she stopped the Silent Valley Project, in an effort to protect the rain forests of the Western Ghats. It was a decade of more success in conservation than failure, and again in 1979-80 she also had drafted the Forest Conservation Act and piloted it through the Parliament. It is this Act that has to the largest extent kept our forests alive in 2002. Most greedy politicians hate it because it empowers only the Ministry of Environment and Forests to release forest land on a case by case basis. Without this Act, I doubt, we would have had any forests left. Let us look at this decade which in the first part was full of the strongest political will ever to be found in the last century. On 23 January 1980 the President of India addressed the joint houses of Parliament and referred to the need for setting u p a specialized machinery with adequate powers to incorporate in all planned development measures to maintain an ecological balance. This was the beginning of a new year, a new decade, and Indira Gandhi had just come back to power after a gap of two years. It was a great moment for her to act on her favourite subject—the forests and wildlife of India. These first years of the 1980s were to be memorable in the history of our forests and wildlife. The President had declared national commitment to the subject and by the end of February, Indira Gandhi had set u p a high-powered committee under the chairmanship of the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. The committee would r e c o m m e n d legislative m e a s u r e s a n d the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machinery necessary to ensure environmental protection. Its final report was published in September 1980 and we shall look at it later. On 6 March 1980 Indira G a n d h i l a u n c h e d the World Conservation Strategy of the IUCN and stated in her keynote address: 'The need of the poor for livelihood, the greed of middlemen for quick profits, the demands of industry, and the short-sightedness of the administration have created ecological problems. It is sad that

THE G A N D H I ERA

277

even scientists, because of their collection activities, have contributed to the disappearance of several species of orchids and other plants in our Himalayan foothills. The manner in which we are encroaching upon our forests and mountains and are permitting the indiscriminate cutting of beautiful and useful old trees is alarming. In spite of the Government of India's Forest Policy Resolution, we have lost large areas in the last 30 years. As a result, there have been soil erosion, floods, and the silting of reservoirs and rivers. Large tracts of land have become saline or alkaline. One of our immediate tasks is to restore the ecosystems of the Himalaya and other mountain ranges. Can we ensure that by the end of the century, the Himalayas will have the same extent of vegetable cover as prevailed at the beginning of this century? Nature is beautifully balanced. Each little thing has its own place, its duty and special utility. Any disturbance creates a chain reaction which may not be visible for some time. Taking a fragmentary view of life has created global and national problems. In his arrogance with his own increasing knowledge and ability, man has ignored his dependence on the earth and has lost his communion with it. He no longer puts his ear to the ground so that the earth can whisper its secrets to him. He has cut his links from the elements and has weakened resources which are the heritage of millions of years of evolution—all those living or inanimate things which sustained his inner energy (earth, water, air, the flora and fauna). This loosening of his intuitive response to nature has created a feeling of alienation in him and is destructive of his patrimony. So, while we have to think of conservation, we must ask whether man himself is growing into a being worth saving.' On 20 April 1980, Indira Gandhi wrote a detailed letter to all the chief ministers in India and the governors of the states reflecting her concern about the state of affairs in Forest India and asking for immediate correctives. I quote some of the important parts of what she said: 'Since our Government took office, and even before, we have been getting numerous reports and complaints about the denudation of

278

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

our forests and depredations on our wildlife. Felling of trees, indiscriminate shooting of animals, poaching, smuggling of precious wood and animal skins, and similar destructive activity have gone unchecked for some time now. The time has come when we can no longer look upon all this with equanimity or try to rationalise it by treating it as part of the inexorable process of development. The maintenance of the ecological balance should be as much a part of the developmental process as the working of our national resources. I have been receiving a great deal of information from within the country and abroad about the ravages to which our forests and wildlife have been subjected. Many forests with precious species of plants, green and other organisms have been thoughtlessly leased out to forest contractors who are concerned with immediate profits and cannot be expected to give consideration to the long-term effects of their action. Hence the wide-scale destruction. Poachers and smugglers of animal skins, etc., have not been far behind. Together, they have chipped away steadily at many of our sanctuaries and forest reserves. Much of the good work done in setting up wildlife sanctuaries and bird sanctuaries has been nullified by their activities. It is a matter for introspection as to how far the governments and their machinery have acquiesced in, if they have not aided and abetted, this whole process of steady destruction. We cannot allow this sad state of affairs to continue and must bring about a total reversal of these trends. It is in recognition of this that the President in his address to Parliament called for urgent action in the area of afforestation, flood control, soil conservation and preservation of flora and fauna. Efforts to preserve our environment are a joint responsibility of the Centre and the States and, in fact, of all right-thinking people. At the Centre, we have already set up a Committee to suggest legislative and administrative measures to maintain ecological balance. ... the major effort at the field level will have to come from State Governments and I am afraid that without specific and immediate action by State Governments to check the activities of forest contractors and poachers, while also making determined

THE G A N D H I ERA

279

attempts to extend the area under forests and vegetative cover, we shall not make headway. I suggest for your consideration some specific measures. These are: 1. Officers with the right attitude should be posted in reserved forests and sanctuary areas; if possible, a special corps of such officers could be identified for duties relating to wildlife and forest and environment conservation. 2. Forest development corporations or similar agencies should be asked to take up plantations on steep hill sites, catchment areas and clear-felled forest areas so that productive forestry and protective forestry go hand in hand. 3. A massive programme of social forestry should be taken up both under the Food for Work Programme and under other specified schemes. The wastelands in villages, all community lands, field bunds, canal bunds, etc., should be clothed with fast-growing species under this useful scheme. 4. In areas where tribals depend heavily on forests for their livelihood, they should be involved in replanting the species that they are already exploiting. A scheme of forest farming should be undertaken. Particular attention must be paid to the replanting or fresh planting of fruit trees. 5. The existing regulations and security arrangements in sanctuaries should be tightened. Poaching should be dealt with very severely. 6. Intelligence machinery to detect smuggling of valuable species like red sanders and sandalwood, or of animal furs and skins must be strengthened and personal interest must be shown by top people in administration to see that such activities are ruthlessly suppressed. 7. The system of contracting away forest areas should be replaced or modified to see that every tree felled should be replaced by the planting of at least another one if not more. 8. Tree plantation programmes should be undertaken by schools and other institutions. Some countries have initiated a programme of a tree for every child.

280

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

9. Serious attempts must be made to change the orientation of all persons working in the Forest Service and forest administration with a system of rewards and incentives for those who do better in preserving or extending the forest areas. We should also give thought to some other measures needed preserve our environment. Please devote some time every week review the developments in this field personally or through one your senior colleagues. I shall be glad to have your suggestions also an indication what your State proposed to do or has done this field.'

to to of as in

Look how far-sighted the then Prime Minister was. I know that no one has written or uttered these words again. The tragedy is that in twenty-two years most of what she stated never really happened, except for bits and pieces of social forestry and plantation work and that also in the most haphazard of ways. I, from the outside, am still fighting for reform in the forest service and for a sub-cadre of forest officers to focus their work in protected areas. There are so many vested interests in the system at play that new ideas get buried so fast that it is unimaginable. Suffice to say that we still fight for the same things that Indira Gandhi wanted done twenty-two years ago. Again on 2 May 1980 Indira Gandhi wrote to all the governors and chief ministers of the states of India. Her follow-up was r e m a r k a b l e . Her focus w a s on the i m p r o v e m e n t of the infrastructure that governed wildlife and forests. She wanted this sector to be fully staffed and suggested in this letter that ' ... Wildlife Advisory Boards in your states should meet regularly to review the progress in the preservation of sanctuaries and stopping the exploitation of game.' She always wanted these leaders to personally ensure all the above. She would have been shocked to realize that just in the matter of staffing in 2002 there was a 30 per cent vacancy in the forest staff who are the guardians of Forest India. On 23 May 1980 Indira Gandhi reconstituted the Indian Board for Wildlife to provide more teeth to her policies. On 23 June 1980 she lost her son Sanjay Gandhi in an air accident. But she never

THE G A N D H I ERA

281

stopped. On 28 July 1980 at a conference concerning the future Indira Gandhi's message was very clear: 'We must discover the art of living with nature and growing with evolution. How long can we draw upon the exhaustible resources of the earth? Many new forms of energy await harnessing.' On 11 August 1980 Indira Gandhi made some interventions in Parliament. This w a s just before she piloted the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 in the Parliament: 'Concern with ecology in India, as Hon. Members have pointed out, is not a new one. It has been there from time immemorial. It is mentioned in our Vedas. It has nothing to do with religion. It is concerned with the preservation of Man, with the preservation of conditions on Earth which will enable Man to survive. It is our own fault that we have not been able to live up to this. We find that a number of projects, although they have done good and have helped to develop an area, have also had side effects which have done a great deal of harm. But in other places also, certain projects have resulted in deforestation which, in time, has caused siltation of rivers, floods and other such effects which have caused and are causing year after year tremendous damage to people. Basically, many of our troubles today are due to the overexploitation of the soil. This does not mean that fertilizer is bad. We are for the use of fertilizers, but not overuse. We have constantly to draw the line. We should have mixed forests with trees which enrich the soil and can provide employment and enable the local people to earn a livelihood. Now, we are laying stress on this aspect and we are going to lay stress on it in our planning. Already some States, notably Himachal, have taken steps in this direction.' If only Indira Gandhi had known that big development projects would create havoc in the 1990s—the era of big dams and ecological damage. And with all this continued the endless monocultures in degraded areas. The wisdom of mixed forests is so easily forgotten when there is no one at the top who cares. A nation can turn over-exploitative within hours and that is what happened in the 1990s.

282

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

In this same speech to Parliament she went on to say: 'I should like to pay a tribute to those, especially in UP, who have prevented contractors from cutting down their trees and have mounted a movement ... the Chipko Movement. We can create this awareness amongst our people everywhere and be on the lookout as to what is going on. Some decisions regarding projects make it difficult to safeguard particular areas. We are determined that we should not repeat such mistakes.' 'Chipko' means to get stuck to, and the first people who protected trees in this manner were the Bishnois in Rajasthan. Three hundred and fifty of them lost their lives protecting the Khejri trees. In the Himalayas large tracts of forests were protected by the Chipko Movement. One of the early leaders of this movement, Sundar Lai Bahuguna, fought throughout the 1990s against the massive ecological damage taking place there, but to a large extent this was in vain. The political leadership of the country no longer had the same sensitivities. Irrespective of her son's death a few months earlier Indira Gandhi, as far as forests and wildlife were concerned, was like an unstoppable steam engine. On 25 August 1980 she addressed a meeting of the Central Board of Forestry. She stated: 'I am here not because I have anything very new to say. I know that most of you here are experts and probably know more about the subject than I do. But I have come in order to demonstrate the importance which Government gives to this subject. What I have to say is not new, but some things have to be repeated so that they sink in, and with this repetition we are able to create the right climate. As a child, and even now, I feel oneness with nature. I was brought up to love forests and trees. But today this is no longer a matter of personal taste. It is of relevance to the country's economy and the well-being of our people. In 1952 our National Forest Policy aimed at covering 33 per cent of the land area with forests. What is the situation today? I am told it is a most disturbing one. On record the forest area is only

THE G A N D H I ERA

283

23 per cent of the total geographical area and only 10 per cent has good forest cover. The reckless and indiscriminate felling of trees, especially on our Himalayan slopes for immediate profit either of contractors or in the name of development, has proved hazardous. Forest personnel should consider themselves as custodians of the future. At present their training is a rather narrow one. It must be reviewed. We must change the attitude of conservators and others concerned, and give them a much wider approach. They are in charge not only of forests but of all that lives in forests, all its wildlife. Forests can be saved and improved if the initiative for their preservation and development comes from those who spend their days in them and for them. I am glad to learn that you are going to discuss some forest legislation because there is no doubt that more comprehensive forest legislation is needed to curb the rapacity of our poachers, smugglers, those who break the rules with regard to the shooting of game, and most important of all the contractors. Such laws should take note of the forest as a whole, including the preservation of the flora and fauna. Sometimes, there is a tendency to assume that having a law solves the problem. But we have seen from experience that legislation is not enough. The officials in charge, who live nearby and even others who may not be directly concerned, must be constantly on the lookout to see that rules and laws are not broken and greater attention is paid to educate the public and punish the guilty. Until recently the Andhra Pradesh Government had on its Statute Books from as far back as 1873 a 'Wild Elephant Preservation Act' although for many years there have been no wild elephants. This is a sombre example of our traditional belief in mantras. The Act was preserved but not the elephant! The ills of the world are often attributed to materialism. Has there ever been a time when there was no materialism? What has gone wrong is the alienation, the moving away from one's roots, from basic values and timeless truth. Emulating our ancient sages with regard to respecting the earth and enriching it instead of fighting with it or depleting it is not going to solve all our problems. But it is

284

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

a step in the right direction. I hope this Conference will help India to take this step.' Though she could not bring reform into the forest service and probably because forest officers did not want it, she was, shortly after this speech, able to b r i n g to P a r l i a m e n t the Forest Conservation Act. She would have been happy to know that just below Tirupati some wild elephants did enter Andhra Pradesh! What Indira Gandhi said in 1980 is true twenty-two years later. There are lots of policies, lots of recommendations, lots of laws, but little will to enforce them. Acts get preserved for posterity but not whom the Acts were made for. For Indira Gandhi this was the moment that started the formulation of the Forest Conservation Act—the most comprehensive legislation to be enacted in 1980. For her, it was an extraordinarily active time in relation to Forest India. On 15 September 1980 the committee for recommending legislative measures and administrative machinery for environmental protection submitted its report to Indira Gandhi. N.D. Tiwari (presently Chief Minister of Uttaranchal), then Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission and Chairman of the committee stated in his letter to Indira Gandhi: 'Under your leadership, the National Development Council at its recent meeting has also, for the first time in the history of Indian planning, approved the following major objectives for the Sixth Plan: 'Bringing about harmony between the short- and the long-term goals of development by promoting the protection and improvement of ecological and environmental assets'. He went on to state: 'We need a suitable institutional arrangement in the form of a properly structured government department for ensuring that this objective is translated into reality. Since such a department will require for its successful functioning the cooperation of all other departments of government, we have proposed that you may be good enough to keep such a department under your direct charge'.

THE G A N D H I ERA

285

Tiwari knew that Indira Gandhi had the political will to ensure that the department of environment would work and therefore he wanted it in her direct charge. The committee asked for the i m m e d i a t e creation of a Department of Environment under the charge of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister accepted the report. The Tiwari Committee, as it was called, had done its work. In November 1980 the Department of Environment was set up as the focal agency in the administrative structure of the Central government for p l a n n i n g , p r o m o t i o n , and coordination of e n v i r o n m e n t a l programmes. At long last the subject had been separated from the ministry of agriculture. It was in this committee and as members of it that both M. Krishnan and Billy Arjan Singh made their pertinent comments on what they thought should happen. Below are some extracts from what M. Krishnan stated: 'I suggested 5 per cent of the total land area to be preserved in perpetuity, which would include the wildlife preserves now designated by various names (sanctuaries, national parks, tiger reserves) and also the 'biospheres' envisaged in this draft report, and also the country's geomorphological features. The Committee is reluctant to recommend any specific percentage. The reasons for this reluctance are not clear, and are probably rooted in an apprehension of the procedural difficulties involved. I submit that in a matter of such national importance, a more dynamic and constructive response should be made. Note that in the 5 per cent of the total land area proposed by me, 2.3 per cent which, as per the draft report, is already occupied by various kinds of wildlife preserves. This 2.3 per cent, as clearly set out in the report, is merely a statistic on the basis of the areas called, and 'so-called', wildlife preserves. In most of them the most objectionable and depletive practices are permitted and indulged in, such as diverse kinds of forestry operations including plantations of exotics, cattle grazing, the collection of forest produce and firewood, and even subsidised supplies to industries. Further, many of these preserves are of too small an area to be self-sustaining if strict protection is

286

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

accorded. Actually, on the basis of some 30 years' experience of these preserves of all over India, I am sure only about 1.2 to 1.5 per cent would ultimately remain within the 5 per cent contemplated by me, leaving plenty of room for the proposed biospheres and geomorphological features—even purely cultural features would be covered by the 5 per cent proposed (such as ancient ruins). To suggest more than 5 per cent, with the terrific pressure of land by our vast human populations, growing industries and hopefully, more productive agriculture, would be self-defeatist—one sure way of failing in any national cause is to attempt too much, to bite off more than we can chew. On the contrary, it may be argued that 5 per cent is too much. That is not a sound, well-based, realistic view. Since, as envisaged, 1.2 to 1.5 per cent would be taken up by existing wildlife preserves only some 3.5 per cent would be left for new wildlife preserves (including floristic preserves), biospheres (which would necessarily be of large area) and geomorphological features. If the Constitution needs to be changed to permanently assure the physical identity and character of India to future generations of Indians, it must be changed—this is no small matter, the issue of our national integrity. For the immediate present, to save what is left before it is too late, a thin-end-of-the-wedge strategy may be utilised, by the Centre taking over from the States areas typically representative of the Indianness of India (to a maximum of 5 per cent of the total land area) on lease, on a nominal rent, for a period of 49 or even only 20 years. The establishment of these reserves on a permanent constitutional basis may then be taken up.' Twenty-two years after M. Krishnan's remarks we still only have 4.3 per cent of our land mass as protected areas and I doubt if we shall ever reach the magical figure of 5 per cent. Billy Arjan Singh was most vocal on the creation of an Indian Wildlife Service. He believed that if wildlife was to be protected, there had to be a cadre that protected it: 'I maintain with absolute conviction that the fragile status of wildlife, which has deteriorated to crisis proportions due to abusive practices

THE G A N D H I ERA

287

as a State Subject, should be immediately taken over to by the Department of Environment to be administered by a Central Wildlife Service. Wildlife has no fear imperative to assist in its future survival, and I feel that once the euphoria of creative effort is over, the preservation of wildlife may once again be relegated to its pristine state in the order of priorities. The draft Sixth Five-Year Plan 1978-83 recommends that 25 per cent of forest area should be taken over for wildlife preservation, and this area should be identified immediately for management by the Wildlife Service, with the present Parks and Sanctuaries as a working nucleus. A moratorium should be declared on commercial operations in all forests, and fresh priorities for the functioning of the forest department should be laid down for wildlife management.' To this day that cadre evades us. There is no wildlife service or national park service in this country. The reason for this is that the majority of forest service officers do not want it. On 1 October 1980 Indira Gandhi gave her wildlife message for the nation. In it she stated: 'Most people do not realize the value of wildlife for human existence. Man survives as part of the biosphere which is made up of different communities of living organisms—plants, animals, human beings. Everything in the world is interrelated and all are mutually dependant. By protecting wildlife we express our concern for all life and thus for our own. The Government attaches high importance to the preservation of wildlife and the education of public in this regard. As chairman of the Indian Board for Wildlife, I urge all people to cooperate with our efforts.' By November 1980 India h a d its first ever Department of Environment. Looking at it from the perspective of today it must have been a remarkable achievement. The subject of forests would continue to remain in the Agricultural Ministry but wildlife would become a part of the new Department of Environment. On

288

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

22 December 1980 just before the year ended Indira Gandhi, in a message to the Environment Forum of the Members of Parliament, stated: 'In life, the environment should not become the enemy of the important. What we do today ought not to prejudice what we might have to do tomorrow. But economic man has been guided more by greed than by wisdom. He has felled trees, destroyed forests, ripped open the earth, wiped away many species of plants and animals, burnt up fuel. He arrogantly regards all creation as his slave. From the beginning of time, sages have warned human beings not to be rapacious and to look upon all life and even non-life with kindly eyes. Only now, when the technology of warfare and economic exploitation has become ruthlessly efficient, have a large number of people become suddenly aware that life itself might be extinguished and that nature will not care for man unless he cares for it. Science, which concerned itself preponderantly with creation and destruction, is now turning its attention to the other task of preservation.' It was also in 1980 that Indira Gandhi gave her full support to the Man and Biosphere Programme and under her stewardship the first biosphere reserves were planned. Sadly even to this day these reserves have remained only on paper. I have given an example of the kind of year 1980 was for Indira Gandhi. Let us also quickly glance through the changes that had taken place from 1880. Forest cover had reduced from 32 per cent to 20 per cent. Agriculture had increased from 31 per cent to 45 per cent. In this one hundredyear period at least forty-three million hectares of land turned into fields for crops. The expansion of agriculture took place at the cost of forest India. Of course the human population had tripled in one hundred years from just over 200 million to nearly 700 million. On 9 February 1981 Indira Gandhi chaired the fourteenth meeting of the Indian Board for Wildlife. She stressed the need for proper and effective implementation of the policies and programmes already initiated by the government and called for a 'multi-dimensional approach' in dealing with matters concerning

THE G A N D H I ERA

289

environmental protection including the conservation of wildlife and its habitats. This was one of the first times that Indira Gandhi referred to the need for involving people from the villages in or near wildlife areas into the process of conservation. It was this historic meeting that created the first processes of eco-development in order to involve local communities and it was at this meeting that this approach was commended to the Central and state governments. Again, Billy Arjan Singh fought for the decision to create a separate wildlife service but was neutralized in his efforts by his colleagues. Few k n e w then that the Global E n v i r o n m e n t Facility supported by the World Bank would put seventy million dollars in 1996-7 into eco-development—and it would be a project which would have negative impacts on our protected area systems. Too much money was p u m p e d into too few areas. The menu of activities to be implemented were too diverse and included all kinds of income generation activities for the local communities. The forest staff was already plagued with vacancies. Though this project promised fresh recruits in its implementation, no one was recruited. Front-line staff were brought in to do rural development work. Village mafias made lots of money and so did many others. I spent months fighting this project realizing that it would have disastrous impacts, but it was in vain. International money is seldom refused. At the United Nations Conference on New and Renewable Sources of Energy in Nairobi on 10 August 1981, Indira Gandhi stated: 'We humans have regarded Earth not just as a playground but as a place to use, despoil, and to destroy. We are too engrossed with the immediate, too absorbed with petty individual problems, to look at basic issues. Today's problem has taken centuries to grow into its present threatening proportions. We are searching for new and renewable resources because the fossil fuels on which we had grown dependent are, fast and recklessly, being depleted, in the hands of the few who control them.

290

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

If the laws of nature are thwarted, renewable sources will also be exhausted. The indiscriminate felling of trees had denuded our forests, creating disastrous ecological imbalances that affect the very quality of life. In its sternest form, nature exacts retribution for the treeless scars on its mountain sides; landslides, devastating floods and silting up of reservoirs and rivers are the result. Rainfall begins to dwindle and the desert resumes its deadly march.' In this very conference she also stated: 'This concept of environmental protection is not new to us. Indian tradition has taught us that all forms of life are closely interlinked. Traditionally we have prayed for the welfare not only of all men but of all animals and plants and even of the five elements of life— earth, water, air, fire, and space. Following this tradition, the Indian Constitution has made specific reference to the need for ecological safeguards, and the environment has been recognised as an issue of national concern at the political level.' In the Standing Committee meeting of the Indian Board for Wildlife chaired by Indira Gandhi on 19 August 1981, she desired that during Wildlife Week educating and entertaining programmes on wildlife should appear every day on All India Radio and Doordarshan and these programmes should bring out the beauty and importance of wildlife. It was at this meeting that S.P. Shahi, the new representative of the eastern region for the Indian Board for Wildlife stressed the need for introducing a specific column in the annual confidential reports of IFS Officers for assessing their work in wildlife conservation. This issue is pending to this day. Forest officers fight between themselves about it. On 20 September 1981 in her message for Wildlife Week she stated: In its unending struggle for survival; the human species sharpened its mental and physical endowments and became master of the Earth. Man's achievements have been truly remarkable. But somewhere

THE G A N D H I ERA

291

along the journey he forgot that his only one link in the chain of existence and that without other links he may not be able to survive. We humans are dependant on the animal and the vegetable kingdoms and these, although blessed with incredible vitality, cannot prosper without our consideration and cooperation. Through our indifference and self-centredness, we have already caused severe stress to the natural order. The responsibility on the present generation is an onerous one. Let us give back to Nature what we have taken from it—creativity and capacity for renewal. Wildlife Week is only a short step towards a distant destination. When it comes again next year, I hope we shall be in a position to claim that our animal friends are more secure and their environment more congenial than a year ago.' At the centenary celebrations of forest education in Dehra Dun on 19 December 1981 she stated: T h e contractors' axe and human greed are destroying our forests, causing great ecological damage, erosion and floods and depriving many of their traditional livelihood.' And about the Indian Forest Service she stated: 'It is sad that there is such a high rate of depletion of direct recruits and a tendency to treat this service as less than some others. Apart from the fact that every task is important, there is something special about trees and closeness to nature. Surely, there do exist young men and women who would respond to the call of this profession which is interesting as well as emotionally and aesthetically fulfilling. We should be able to recruit bright young men and women into forestry. So far, very few women have been drawn to it. Perhaps there is a mistaken belief that it is a man's job. But all over the world women are taking on more and more such jobs in all fields of activity. I wish more women would feel interested in forestry, particularly in social forestry, because it involves direct interaction with village womenfolk.' For some reason she could never get the support of the forest service to reform and restructure themselves and in my opinion

292

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

this was the service's greatest failing. Because of this fact the service has become one of the weakest all over India. At the first National Conference of Legislators on Environment on 30 April 1982 Indira Gandhi stated: 'The conservation of our rapidly shrinking natural resources under commercial or population pressures has now assumed critical importance. A report that I saw brought out by the Forest Survey of India on the natural forest areas which still retain their primary character reveals that only very scattered small pockets are left, most of which are combined to existing protected areas. Viable tropical humid forests now remain only in Kerala, Arunachal Pradesh and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. And I think, you, all Members of Parliament; are specially aware of the pressures on us. Therefore increase of plantation or putting up of industries and so on and cutting down of these valuable forests which represent the richest sources of genetic diversity must be fully protected and scientifically maintained in biosphere reserves which will help us to ensure the improvement and survival of cultivated plants and domesticated animals as well as help the advance of many pharmaceutical industries. Any continuation of forest felling in these areas, without consideration of large number of other plant and animal species of great genetic value, will destroy irretrievably a vast unknown reservoir of biological wealth which is not merely a national but a world resource, and needs rational protection and management. We have a precious heritage of plants here like the neem and the peepul which are now being largely ignored even in planting forests, of animals like the elephant and the rhinoceros, of birds like the peacock, the mynah and the bustard. We give winter shelter to many beautiful birds which come from Siberia, like the Siberian crane which also must be protected. The whole panorama of our flora and fauna is one of extraordinary diversity and profusion and beauty, of course. Any carelessness can easily lose us this heritage leaving rubble, rust and pollution in its place. As responsible people, each one of us should give serious thought to this and to the future; and plan our work accordingly.'

THE G A N D H I ERA

293

On 18 May 1982 in New Delhi Indira Gandhi received the order of the Golden Ark from Prince Bernhard of Netherlands. In her speech she said: 'Prince Bernhards's work and concern for wildlife is well known. I feel privileged to accept the Order of the Golden Ark. What a beautiful thought and a beautiful name! My own involvement with flora and fauna preceded any ideas on conservation. As a child I felt a closeness to the earth. When I began to read, I found an echo in D.H. Lawrence's words: "I am part of the Sun as my eye is part of me. That I am part of the earth my feet know perfectly, and my blood is part of the Sea . . . . My soul is an organic part of the great human soul as my spirit is part of my nation . . . . I am part of the great whole and, I can never escape." In my world, animals and plants played an important part. Human contacts are through the intermediary of the spoken work, which is so often misconstrued. Also, they are largely governed ... by thinking and behaviour, which are preconditioned by social or other circumstances. With animals and plants, I could be totally myself. In India we are fortunate in having a long tradition of protection of animals and of feeling for plants. In ancient times cow protection was an economic necessity. Similarly, flowers were integral to religious rites and plants were used not only for food but for medicinal and other purposes. Asoka, who was emperor in the third century bc has left edicts on rocks, enjoining upon us to treat animals with kindness and care.' It is clear from the above quotes how deep Indira Gandhi's beliefs were in the natural world. She loved it and therefore cared for it and created an enormous political will in the country to save it. At the second meeting of the Standing Committee of the IBWL on 1 July 1982 chaired again by Indira Gandhi, a clear decision was taken to prevent Arab hunters and other foreigners to kill the bustard. This was also a meeting that pushed for the rapid establishment of the Wildlife Institute of India. At this meeting a

294

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

decision was also taken to create a task force to elicit public support for wildlife conservation. This task force was constituted in the middle of September. On 14 September 1982 she wrote to the chief ministers once again reminding them about their priorities. 'For over a decade, I have been emphasising the need for special attention to wildlife conservation and specialised management in this field. This is the reason for the enactment of the Wildlife Protection Act in 1972 and this subject was included in the Concurrent List of the Constitution in 1976. Simultaneously, specific guidelines for the formation of separate wildlife wings in the States and Union Territories were circulated by the Ministry of Agriculture. At the same time the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms also wrote to all the States on this subject. Thereafter, the matter has been pursued at various levels. In 1980, shortly after launching the World Conservation Strategy in India, I wrote to you on the 20 April and again on the 2 May. More lately, the Indian Board for Wildlife has expressed serious concern about the lack of attention by State Governments to the formation and working of separate wildlife wings in the States. The Board wanted the Ministry of Agriculture to examine the position carefully and specially review the working of wildlife wings in some bigger States which claim to have set up such separate wings within the Forest Departments. This exercise has been done in the last few months and the overall picture is most disappointing. Most States have not set up proper wildlife wings, as visualised in the guidelines circulated by the Central Government. Where this has been done, these are not being manned by properly selected and motivated officials. The detailed review with regard to some bigger States has revealed a number of deficiencies. The main points are given in the attached summary. The forthcoming Wildlife Week is from the 1 to 7 October, 1982. Please see that concrete action on each point contained in the attached summary materialises by that time, and that a report on

THE G A N D H I ERA

295

the action taken is sent to me urgently. Please also keep in close touch with the Department of Environment here which has been asked to deal with the wildlife matters in a more intense manner.' Indira Gandhi was continuously pushing the chief ministers to act. On 1 October 1982 the fifteenth meeting of the Indian Board for Wildlife was held. Indira Gandhi chaired it again and the meeting started with the release of a postage stamp on the Hangul, and with an accompanying message from the chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Farooq Abdullah. In her opening remarks, the Prime Minister emphasized the importance of the meeting arising from the fact that this was the first time that a meeting of the Board was being held during the Wildlife Week, and also because it had come up soon after the transfer of wildlife work at the Centre to the Department of Environment. She expressed the hope that the new arrangement would help in giving much-needed closer attention to the subject and lead to quicker results, which would be possible if the fieldlevel agencies work in harmony and with the spirit of mutual help and cooperation. Stressing the need for a nationwide effort based on active public interest and involvement, Prime Minister laid down that the strategy and action programmes for wildlife conservation in the country should aim at: 1. The establishment of a network of protected areas such as national parks, sanctuaries and biosphere reserves, to cover representative samples of all major wildlife ecosystems and with adequate geographic distribution; 2. The restoration of degraded habitats to their natural state, within these protected areas; 3. The rehabilitation of endangered species and their restoration to protected portions of their former habitats, in a manner which provides some reflection of their original distribution;

296

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

4. The provision of adequate protection to wildlife in multiple-use areas (such as production forests and pasture) so as to form "corridors" linking up the protected areas and providing for genetic continuity between them; 5. Support for the management of botanical and zoological parks and garden and undertaking captive breeding programmes for threatened species of plants and animals; 6. The development of appropriate management systems for protected areas, including a professional cadre of personnel fully trained in all aspects of wildlife and sanctuary management, as well as the provision of proper orientation to all officers concerned with wildlife; 7. The development of research and monitoring facilities which will provide a scientific understanding of wildlife p o p u l a t i o n s and habitats essential to their p r o p e r management; 8. Support for wildlife education and interpretation aimed at a wider public appreciation of importance of wildlife to human betterment; 9. The review and updating of statutory provisions for protection to wildlife and regulating all forms of trade, so as to ensure their current effectiveness; 10. Assistance in the formulation and adoption of a National Conservation Strategy for all living natural resources on the lines of the World Conservation Strategy launched in 1980; 11. Participation in international conventions designed to prevent the depletion of the wildlife resources and to provide protection to migratory species; 12. Long-term conservation of wildlife based on the scientific principles of evolution and genetics.' It is tragic that twenty years later none of these twelve points have really been fulfilled. A detailed discussion was held at this meeting of a special sub-cadre within the state forest d e p a r t m e n t s for wildlife management. This was especially so because of the Prime

THE G A N D H I ERA

297

Minister's letter of 14 September 1982 to all the chief ministers on this subject. The minutes of the meeting quoted in part here reflect this vital issue: The Board took note of the existing situation and expressed serious concern about the lack of attention by the State Governments in regard to this matter. It noted that the Prime Minister has again written on 14th September, 1982 to all the Chief Ministers on this subject, and hoped that the States will now initiate appropriate action without delay. The Department of Environment was requested to monitor closely the progress in this regard. Deputy Minister (Env.) emphasised the need for activating the State Wildlife Advisory Boards and stressed that these Boards should meet as often as possible as well as coordinate with the IBWL. At the conference of state forest ministers in New Delhi on 18 October 1982 her address was sharp and precise: As the Minister has just said, I have been writing repeatedly to Chief Ministers on different facets of forestry in these last three years. This was to convey our collective anxiety on the rapid depletion of our forests and the ill effects that this would have on our climate— it is already having—our economic development and our future itself. Fortunately today there is greater awareness all around regarding this problem and a few steps have been taken for the conservation of this precious resource. However it is obvious and a cause for distress that these steps do not go far enough. The Minister was pleased to say that I was a saviour of forestry and wildlife, but I will be saviour only if they are actually saved. So far, they are not saved. Yet when it comes to taking concrete decisions either to stop the cutting of trees or to preserve endangered species of animals or to put down poaching or smuggling of rare species, we waver. The initiatives is left often enough to people who depend upon such activities for their living. I am certain that a total change can be brought about in our whole approach to forestry only if all those who are responsible for decisions, whether they are politicians or

298

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

officials or non-officials, are imbued with a strong commitment to conserve our environment. These ideas will prosper if there is a genuine feeling for them and not merely because it happens to be part of a programme. Perhaps you remember Gandhi/7 saying that when any major decision is to be taken we should recall the face of the Daridranarayan. Similarly when any decision about felling of trees or allowing wildlife to be overrun is taken, we have to think of the life of the tree and the lives of wild animals and how intimately these are bound up with human living. I know that there is tremendous pressure on our forest resources for timber, fuel, forest produce, fodder, etc. I don't minimize the importance of these needs but they should not result in indiscriminate felling of forests. Some hard measures like a ban on felling in all critically affected areas like hill slopes, catchment areas and tank beds are inevitable. The avarice of the contractor must be recognized and dealt with firmly. Only a few States have dispensed with the contracting system. Even in those States, it is necessary to have another closer look as to how the new system works, whether it has resulted in slowing down the rate of depletion. I have received many complaints that State forest departments have totally clear-felled areas before starting plantation. When degraded areas, deforested areas and other vacant government lands are available for plantation, they should be taken up on a priority basis. There are also complaints about monoculture plantation. In India, we are extremely slow in taking up an idea. Once we take it up, we do it to the exclusion of all other ideas. Everything has to be done in proportion. Monoculture has its value but in the overall picture it is better to have mixed forests. That does not mean you should not have specific forests for specific needs. Many scientists have expressed doubts on the wisdom of monoculture plantations, and it is the opinion of conservators and others all over the world that it is more beneficial to have mixed plantations. Replacing species which were already present in forest areas will give the best results. We should pay special attention to plant indigenous species, many

THE G A N D H I ERA

299

of which have diverse uses either because they are fruit-bearing or fodder-giving or of medicinal value. Many of them are also broadleaved which suit our terrain and our climate. So far as wildlife is concerned, recently we have decided to entrust the subject to our Department of Environment. The objective is to ensure that the scientific management of wildlife, which is an integral part of the environment, gets more specialized attention. The intention was not to divorce wildlife from forestry—that cannot be done as the two have to go closely together. But forestry practices in wildlife areas must change. Much more attention has to be paid to endangered species and to wildlife outside sanctuaries. There is a strong demand that forestry also should be removed from agriculture, because of what is now happening, and put along with environment. This will depend on how the forest departments function. If we find that they are not changing their ways, we will have to review the whole situation and if necessary change the whole concept of the service and the way it functions. But it simply cannot continue as it is going on now. That is one thing on which we are all quite definite. The feeling that wildlife is only a matter of curiosity which can be preserved through ecological parks must go. Wildlife has to be wild and it has to survive. I would like to say that I am quite unhappy at the way, for instance, the Gir lions are now treated. They have become quite tame and are no longer wild. They are fed and now they have got no capacity to hunt for themselves. That is not anybody's concept of wildlife nor of a sanctuary. I think that some of our wildlife wardens have been to Africa and seen how beautifully this is managed there and how natural the surroundings are. There the animals come first, not the visitors, no matter how important the visitor is. You are not allowed to make noise—there are so many rules, not for animals, but for the human beings. I think we will have to adopt some of them here. There are good scientific reasons for taking special steps to preserve wildlife. Of course, it has to be managed properly so that no particular species overruns another because that would create

300

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

the same sort of problem which man has created by overrunning his forests. It is distressing that many people still treat the wildlife wing in a perfunctory manner. All posts where important work has to be done relating to working plans on wildlife are not filled up by highly motivated officers with good experience on the subject. There is too high a turnover of personnel in these jobs. The Indian Board for Wildlife has repeatedly drawn my attention to this. As I said earlier, changes have to come from a heartfelt recognition of the importance of the subject. Many State Boards for Wildlife have not met at all. If State Forest Ministers and senior officers of the forest departments devote time to wildlife management only on symbolic occasions like the Wildlife Week, we cannot ensure survival of important species. Our country has a rich variety of flora and fauna, the like of which may not be found in many places. We should be proud of this heritage and try to preserve it. Doubts have been expressed about the preservation of species like crocodiles, elephants, tigers, etc., which sometimes overrun their territory and are considered inimical to human population. It is well known that when these or any other animals are properly managed, they do not pose any threat to human life, and in a way they ensure the survival of the forests themselves. I would like to suggest that in these matters you should be guided by scientific assessment rather than lay beliefs. The emphasis on forestry and wildlife will be translated into concrete programmes only if the necessary resources are made available. I entirely agree with what the minister has said, but as you know this in not completely in his hands or in my hands. It depends on the overall availability of funds, and today we are in an extremely difficult economic situation. But it is true that so far the approach has been to maximize forest revenue and release driblets for plantation programmes. This we must change and I know it may cause some difficulties in States where forest revenue is significant. But if such States want a stable income over a number of years, they should pay heed to what Rao Sahib has said and not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. They should ensure that forests are not cleared in an alarming fashion as now occurs and that replantation either on a large basis or tree plantation must take place simultaneously. We

r THE G A N D H I ERA

301

have asked the Planning Commission to examine the forestry programmes in the Annual Plans and the Five-Year Plans and I hope there will be qualitative changes in the coming years which will reflect our deep concern about forestry. No discussion on forestry can be complete without dealing with lives of tribals and others who live in or around forests. It has caused me great unhappiness to hear about the lifestyle of tribals being affected by forestry programmes and practices and interference of non-tribals. The forester should be a friend of the tribals and see to it that their requirements from the forest are completely met. Stage by stage, they should also be educated in the use of alternative sources so that they can depend on the trees only for fruits and other forest produce which does not result in the destruction of the tree itself.' It would take another two-and-a-half years for forests to be pulled out of the Ministry of Agriculture and for the creation of a ministry of Environment and Forests but all the discussions about it had started. Today I fight to create a separate Ministry of Forests and Wildlife and God knows how long that will take. One rather startling fact is the impact of Africa on Indira Gandhi. She seemed to love African wildlife and the rules that governed it. She always wanted to adapt some of them to India. I would have agreed with her entirely especially after my recent trips to Africa. Alas nothing has ever happened. The system is immune to taking on board good and innovative ideas. On 19 October 1982 the task force to frame guidelines for eliciting public support for wildlife commenced its deliberations first under the chairmanship of K.T. Satarawala but he soon became the lieutenant governor of Goa. So the job was entrusted to Shri Madhavrao Scindia, a young member of Parliament from the Congress party who was later to become a minister in Rajiv's Cabinet. Nearly a year later a really comprehensive report on this issue was completed. In it were included a series of inter-ministry discussions on the issue. In his letter to Indira Gandhi on 6 October 1983 enclosing the report, Madhavrao Scindia stated: 'The task force has at every stage in it's deliberations borne in mind the views you have often expressed that it was only through public

302

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

support and participation that wildlife conservation could be ensured.' He went on to say: 'Our deliberations were guided also by your special concerns for the underprivileged communities living in the vicinity of wildlife reserves, especially of the need to ameliorate the difficulties they experience from the enforcement of wildlife regulations as well as from the depredations by wild animals.' Is it not amazing? Indira Gandhi had all the political will yet all these efforts were in order to raise public support. We have come around a full circle. Today we have no political will and are desperately trying to find it . We do not even think of public support. The 1982 report is totally forgotten and collecting dust. All its recommendations are pending. Indira Gandhi did not have the time in her life to see them through. On 18 November 1982 she sent a message to an Elephant Workshop and stated: 'The Asian elephant is a magnificent animal, strong yet gentle and known for its intelligence and economic utility. Failure to manage its habitat, keeping in view the patterns of elephant herd movements has endangered the species and created problems for humans too.' It was in the same year that she piloted the first amendment to the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, in order to further strengthen it, by further empowering chief wildlife wardens. And it was in 1983 that she gave her full support to the creation of the Wildlife Institute of India which started its first operations in that year. As 1984 turned there were two messages of importance that she articulated before her assassination. In the first in early 1984 she in a message for a wildlife book stated: 'Our forests are shrinking, and many species are endangered by growing towns and cultivation, not to speak of human greed. This is an irreplaceable loss for the world. Now we must look ahead. There is still hope. We have saved the tiger, the lion, the rhinoceros and the bustard. Across the country larger numbers of people are making it their business to come to the rescue of animals.' And then on World Environment Day on 5 June 1984 she said:

THE G A N D H I ERA

303

'On World Environment Day, we in India, in partnership with people all over the world, must rededicate ourselves to the protection and wise management of our life-sustaining environment. Of the many tasks that this entails, perhaps the most crucial is of revegetating uncultivated parts. Vegetation forms a green 'security blanket', protecting the fertile yet fragile soil, maintaining balance in atmospheric conditions, safeguarding supplies of fresh water and moderating their flow to prevent flood and drought. Animal and human life is dependent on vegetation in a myriad ways. But the green cover, especially in our forests, is under attack by the greed of the rich and the need of the poor. This must be corrected. Each person, community and organisation can help. Farmers and craftsmen in villages, managers and workers in public and private sectors, teachers and students, parents and children must all join hands to ensure that barren lands, denuded hill sides and eroded watersheds are alive again with trees and plants.' With Indira Gandhi's assassination in 1984, India's forests and wildlife lost their greatest saviour and spokesperson. Sometimes I think of what might have happened without an Indira Gandhi at all. Horror of horrors! Some things are certain. There would have been no ban on the export of furs in 1968 or the subsequent ban on tiger hunting in 1970. There would have been no Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 or the creation of Project Tiger in 1973. It would have been a free-for-all and by 1975 the tiger would have been nearly extinct. Hunters and timber mafias would have taken their toll. Without the Forest Conservation Act of 1980 I doubt if any of India's primary forests would have been alive in the mid-1980s. Can you visualize a desertified and barren land mass all across India? And no wildlife! We would have had critical water problems and our river systems might have been severely depleted. God knows what else! Rampant disease, infection, flood, and drought—anything would have been possible. We would probably have ended u p with ten or twelve national parks and twenty sanctuaries instead of the seventy-five parks and 475 sanctuaries that we have today. A natural treasury would have

304

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

been plundered, looted, and wiped out. Extinctions would have been frequent. Were there any other politicians who could have made a difference for forests and wildlife at that moment of time in India's history? I seriously doubt it because they did not exist. In a way Indira Gandhi's presence stopped the complete wipe-out of forests and wildlife in the nick of time. The laws or amendments to the laws that were made in her era were like checks and balances to the total anarchy that followed. The laws were the only consistent factor that provided safety to Forest India in the decades that were to come—every political party and all governments have had to follow them. Many have tried to tinker with them and dilute them but since they were laws we were lucky that in the absence of political will judicial will came to the fore to interpret them correctly and keep Forest India protected. A law is always a law and can always be used to deter, minimize damage, and delay destruction. The Indira Gandhi era left a solid base for future leaders to build on. Only her son tried to strengthen the environmental laws of the country when he was Prime Minister and amended the Forest Conservation Act in 1988. After his party lost the election in 1989, little h a p p e n e d except for some controversial amendments to the Wildlife Protection Act in 1991. In fact much has been diluted administratively and through government orders. We should be very clear about one thing. If we have any ecological security left as a nation it is because of Indira Gandhi. Her vision surpassed that of all the conservationists around her. It is because of this vision that in the present century we have something left to fight for. No peoples' movement could have done the same. Public will would have come into being after the destruction of large tracts of forest and when people would have been severely stressed by the depletions. The laws would have come too late. In the 1960s Indira Gandhi steered India on a course that saved the forests and wildlife of the country at least for another fifty years. When Indira Gandhi was assassinated she left many things in the pipeline. Probably the most important was the creation of a new Ministry of Environment and Forests from what was the

T H E G A N D H I ERA

305

Department of Environment. There was also, just before she died, much discussion on the legislation of an Environment Protection Act that could ensure controls on industrial pollution and minimize the negative impacts of haphazard development. A fresh general election at the end of 1984 resulted in Rajiv Gandhi coming to power in end 1984. One of the first events of his prime ministership was the creation of the new Ministry of Environment and Forests which had two departments: one for environment and another for forests and wildlife. This was probably the most sensible decision but sadly, in April 1985, a series of administrative adjustments took place that merged both departments into one. In my opinion, this was a fatal administrative mistake. As the years rolled by environmental issues became totally timeconsuming and in that process forests and wildlife got relegated to oblivion. This 'one-department' concept was a disaster. Let us look briefly at the years 1985-9 and Rajiv Gandhi's role in securing the future of Forest India. Let us look at what he said. On 25 May 1985 he stated in his message for the World Environment Day: 'We have only one earth. It has generously supported life through millions of years of evolution. Its remarkable powers of regeneration have kept it rich and bountiful even in the face of human greed. But modern instruments for the earth's exploitation delivered by science into mankind's possession, and the crushing weight of a growing population, threaten now to strain the earth's environment beyond endurance. Pollution of air and water, large-scale denudation of forests, the extinction of ecosystems, have become the standard bearers of apocalypse. We must preserve and pass on to coming generations an environment purer than that which we have inherited. It is encouraging that large number of people across the world, particularly the young, have dedicated themselves to restoring the environment. This is an affirmation of faith in life.

306

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

In his message on 13 June 1985 for Van Mahotsava he stated: 'Nature has been beautiful to mankind, providing the substance which has been the basis of all cultural and material progress. But we have been profligate in our exploitation of nature's resources. The denudation of our forests is an example. Trees have sustained a wide variety of life forms and provide food, fuel and industrial inputs. They conserve and enrich the soil helping to maintain geological, geographical and climatic conditions. Without them the beauty of our earth would be seriously impaired. The regenerative capacity of forests could have made them a virtually limitless resource, but human vanity and greed, armed with the cunning of modern invention, have led instead to destruction. All over the world forests have shrunk, causing widespread concern. Our country now has only 2 per cent of the world's forests with 14 per cent of its population'" Unlike his mother, Rajiv Gandhi's focus was on issues concerning the e n v i r o n m e n t . His a d d r e s s a n d speeches w e r e about environment and development—about climate change and pollution. There was much less content which directly concerned wildlife and forests. Rajiv was much more empathetic than his mother towards the rights of tribals and forest communities over forests. To him, the process he wanted to follow was 'humane conservation.' There was an innocence in his speeches. He was much more believing in the role of the international community in conservation. He wanted to create the Planet Protection Fund to minimize the negative impacts of development. He even believed in some of his own government schemes like the Ganga Action Plan which he thought would clean the Ganga by the year 1989. It never did. We must be clear that he was not in the league of his mother. His focus was environment and he came under tremendous influence of an environmentalist called Anil Agarwal from the Centre of Science and Environment who I believe advised on many of his speeches on green concerns. But forest and wildlife were Indira Gandhi's true domain.

THE G A N D H I ERA

307

At the inaugural address of the Second World Congress on Engineering and Environment on 7 November 1985 Rajiv Gandhi stated: 'In a developing country one has to balance the costs and benefits of exploiting resources and protecting the environment, whether it is in terms of destruction of certain areas to put up industry or to put up mines or other development projects; whether it is in terms of pollution of rivers, of air or various areas. We must bear in mind that ultimately there is no short cut. If we do not pay a price today we will invariably pay a much heavier price tomorrow. We must build this into our awareness. We have enacted many laws which do not allow certain types of industries to come up in certain areas, and we are trying to give a policy direction so that protected areas will get industries that do not pollute and are clean. We have incorporated this consideration into the very process of clearance of projects. No project can even start unless it has full environmental clearance. We have also gone a step further and ensured that if a particular forest has to be cut to accommodate a project, an equivalent area is replaced at some other location preferably near the same area. Our forest cover in India is already much too low.' As we all realized fifteen years down the line all these words meant little. Compensatory afforestation was a big disaster and project proponents paid little heed to it . Very little got planted back in the field. Mining, oil pipelines, and industries had impacted severely on our protected area networks. Many of the laws remained on paper seldom being enforced. At the twenty-first meeting of the Central Board of Forestry on 22 January 1986 he stated: 'There can be no development. The development of our forests will help our development. Development will be hindered by degeneration of the forests. The question that we face today is not just how fast we can grow but whether we will not be jeopardising our future by further reducing our forest cover.

308

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The national forest policy is aimed at conserving forests, resurrecting our ecosystem, and restoring the geophysical balance along with economic development. This is critical to any country. But to India, in its present state, it is even more than critical. It is vital for our survival It is estimated that one-third of forest cover is a minimum that any country should have. We have various estimates of the actual situation today. Shri Ansari (Minister, Environment and Forests) mentioned 22.7 per cent, with only 10.9 per cent as good cover. When we look at the NRAC estimates they are somewhere around 15 per cent. I do not want to go into which number is right and which is wrong, where the forest ends, where the shrub lands come, or whether the aerial photographs are of the right season or the wrong season. But I think it is fairly well understood that much of the forest land that is shown as forest land in our books, in fact, does not have forest on it. Many times, people have come to me and said: "Why are you stopping construction on that land? There is no forest on that land." But that land with no forest on it is part of the 22.7 per cent. Forest cover appears to be much closer to 10 to 15 per cent than to even 22 per cent, let alone an optimal figure of close to 33 per cent. This puts us squarely in a very dangerous position. The question today is not just of conserving our forest. It must be of increasing the cover under forest. Afforestation must be one of our primary aims. Conservation must be first step, because if we do not preserve what we have got it is pointless trying to plant new areas. It is also cheaper, it is better, it is faster than afforestation. To conserve a forest, we must right at the beginning look at the forests. I should like to say that I have spent substantial time in forest areas, have talked to foresters alone or in groups and have a very high respect for foresters. 1 have some idea of the type of pressures that they come under, the type of conditions they have to operate in, the type of facilities that we give them. Perhaps the starting point, when we look at our foresters, must be the training and education that we give them. Much of our training and education dates back to the British time when the primary aim of a forester was not to conserve and to protect, but to exploit and use the forest. And unless

THE G A N D H I ERA

309

this basic training is changed right at the beginning we are going to find it very difficult at a later stage to suddenly start convincing the forester that he is going down the wrong route. Tribals come under a lot of pressure whenever any Forest Act is made or whenever a forest conservation measure takes place. We start accusing the tribals of doing all sorts of things in the forests, forgetting that they have lived in those forests for hundreds and thousands of years. And somehow forests have survived everything that the tribals might have done to them. Perhaps the problem is not what the tribals do but what we ourselves do in their name. Perhaps some of the trouble is due to a changing social system. The answer does not lie in harsh measures. The answer can only be in the form of explanation, understanding, working together with the tribals to see how the forest can be protected. Wherever I have talked with the tribals I have found that their interest in protecting forests has been more than my own. I look forward to a new thrust from all the States in conserving our forests and in the matter of afforestation. You should not succumb to the easy methods of raising revenue that some States seem to follow. Conservation is not something that we can force on people. It is something which we must build into our thinking right from the early stages of education. It is only then that our children will feel, from deep inside, that it is their duty to conserve and protect what they have inherited and hand it down to the coming generations. I hope that from this meeting we shall be able to give a new, dynamic thrust to this particular programme.' The year 1986 was a critical year. Rajiv Gandhi passed the Environment Protection Act which is even today the pillar of all our environmental protection policies. The language had changed, the rhetoric had changed, so had the fashions of the world. How could the forest satisfy the needs of the people? What rights did forest communities have on the forests they lived in? It was all about planting more trees than saving primary forests, and wildlife was seldom focussed on. Rajiv Gandhi went to national parks nearly each Christmas and New Year in the 1980s. He enjoyed it but his feelings did not have the

310

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

depth or the passion of his mother. He even visited Ranthambhore in 1986 and spent more than a week watching wild tigers, and even a tiger killing a deer in the middle of the day. He took endless pictures and loved the experience. I know that on his Ranthambhore trip he enjoyed discussing the problems of the forest with the forest staff but in the end little happened about r e s o l v i n g the p r o b l e m s of f o r e s t e r s or even p r e v e n t i n g monoculture plantations from replacing primary forests. There was always more talk and less action. On the 6 February 1986 he addressed the National Land Use and Wasteland Development Council in New Delhi and stated: 'Our wastelands are almost as extensive as our agricultural lands. Degraded lands account for almost two-thirds of our agricultural and forest lands. Forest cover which should be close to 30 per cent and to maintain an ecological balance is dropping very close to ten per cent and endangering our very survival. The prospects of an ecological disaster, the prospects of food scarcity really threaten us if we do not tackle this problem actively enough. We have watched too long our forests disappearing. We are now at the point of endangering our whole ecosystem. This cannot be achieved by any one section but by an involvement of all the people. It is an achievable target. It must be developed into a people's movement—decentralisation of nurseries, tree growers' cooperatives, tree patta schemes—farmers, youth, women, everyone must be involved in this programme. The landless, marginal and small farmer must be a key element in bringing about the success of this programme. We must enthuse everyone right across the country to participate in this programme.' On 5 July 1986—the World Environment Day—he said about his mother: 'IndirajV perhaps did more than any other world leader to bring about an awareness among the people of our environment and the dangers of depleting the environment for short-term developmental gains. IndirayV's work for protecting the environment has brought

THE G A N D H I ERA

311

about a great degree of awareness in India about the dangers that we will face if we destroy our environment.' It was again the same year of 1986 that Rajiv Gandhi piloted amendments in the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, that completely restricted the trade in trophies and animal articles. This was vital to end the illegal trade in 'old stocks'. I think by 1987 there was a marked shift in the emphasis as the concept of 'human needs' in forests were articulated and there w a s m u c h talk a b o u t economics, d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d the environment. I have tried to pluck quotes from his speeches that connect to Indira Gandhi and Forest India but the process is more difficult. The times were changing. Indira Gandhi could respond in a flash to even a letter. I remember Peter Jackson telling me (he was the former chairman of the Cat Specialist Group) how when he wrote to her about the thousands of flamingos that occupied the shoreline at Porbandar in Gujarat and that it should be protected. Within forty-eight hours she had instituted the area as a sanctuary. This w a s the level of decision-making in the 1970s. Rajiv on the other hand, was stuck with projects and environmental clearances, and the importance of development and environment going hand in hand. Slowly forests and wildlife took a back seat. In fact he believed that even Parliamentarians had, in general, become more sensitive to the environment and no longer wished to get projects going without the necessary clearance and environmental safeguards. If only Rajiv knew the reality of the 'clearance game' and what the 1990s would bring. But in the last years of the 1980s his full focus was on the 'environment'. In a speech given while inaugurating the third governing council meeting of South Asia Cooperative E n v i r o n m e n t Programme on 12 January 1987 he stated: 'We cannot have development today without evaluating the full cost of every project, not just the immediate cost but the long-term cost. We cannot leave the long-term part of that cost for future generations to pay. We cannot leave the legacy of deficit in development. We

312

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

have to account for it during our own generation. The cost of protecting the environment goes up higher as the environment gets more degraded. We have seen today thefirefightingthat we are having to do to protect the environment. It is a very heavy drain on our exchequer. But if it had been during the earlier phases of our development, the cost would have been much less. What is needed is a holistic view of the human needs of the area, of the poor who are living in and around the forests and the environment that needs protection. Man and nature have lived in harmony for centuries. The balance was not upset. The tribals who lived in forests have not upset the balance in the forests. It is what we call civilization and development that has encroached upon nature and has destroyed her environment. We must develop the right tools of development and for protection of the environment. We must develop the human genius to give us the right answers.' Little was developed. In fifteen years of the Environment Protection Act none of its clauses were used against its violators. 94 per cent of all mandatory environmental conditions were violated by all project proponents. The laws were never enforced and no one was punished. It is my view that in 1987-8 Indira Gandhi's policy of 'protection' of wildlife and forests was giving way to more environment-focused concepts and especially the focus on how tribal and local communities could enter the arena for managing the forests, be it by joint forest management approaches or something else. Easier said than done. The 1990s would reveal how some of the most damaging initiatives got disguised and clothed in tribal 'apparel', and such approaches led to the creation of endless mafias in villages around Forest India and endless armchair environmentalists fuelled the process. A great tragedy it was! On 6 July 1987 at the World Commission on Environment and Development, Rajiv Gandhi describes some of the achievements of his government including the legislation of the Environment Protection Act of the previous year.

THE G A N D H I ERA

313

'Thanks to this widespread recognition of the importance of protecting our environment, we have been able to bring about a comprehensive new Act on protecting our environment last year. We have set up a National Wastelands Development Board whose target is to reclaim five million hectares per year once it get going at full speed. We have started a major programme of cleaning our rivers starting with the Ganga. At the last big Mela that took place in Hardwar, the water was clean enough to be drinkable directly from the river. Our objective is that by the time the next major fair comes along in January 1989 in Allahabad, the Ganga there will be clean enough to drink from. Conservation strategies have been worked out for ecologically fragile zones. We have 127 agro-climate zones for which we are setting up National Agricultural Research Projects. For endangered plants and animal species, we have established biosphere reserves and taken many other measures. We are making the planning and implementation agencies responsible for environmental consequences of their developmental activities. It is also necessary to see that work that has already started does not further damage the environment. We shall, I am sure, benefit tremendously from international cooperation in protecting the environment. We ourselves are ready to contribute what we can to international cooperation in building a movement that will protect the environment and link environment to development and to new economic order.' By 2002 the EPA of 1986 had not enforced even one of the millions of violation cases that had been filed. The Wastelands Board has done little and the Ganga is as dirty as ever. The biosphere reserves have not even started to function! Probably his most famous speech on green issues was at the UN General Assembly on 19 October 1987: 'Although they bear the brunt of environmental damage, the poor are themselves little responsible for any of that damage. For centuries they have lived in harmony with nature. The problem is caused by large scale commercial exploitation, which garners the profits but escapes the consequences. Yet, when laws are passed and rules are

314

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

made to conserve the environment, the burden falls on those who have gained the least and suffered the most. The people of the forest cannot suddenly be cordoned off from its bounty. Fuel and building materials must be made available at prices they can afford. Shepherds and cowherds must be found alternative pastures or provided fodder. To be effective, conservation must be humane. That is the challenge before us. A large number of animal and plant species are seriously threatened. Apart from the ethical and aesthetic case for protecting these disappearing species, it is possible, answers to unsolved problems of health and survival might be found in the yet undiscovered secrets of these gene pool reserves.' Of course the sad part of all these speeches was that the largescale commercial exploitation accelerated rapidly, following no law at all. When he inaugurated the Balphakram National Park in Meghalaya's West Garo Hills on 27 December 1987 he said: 'It will be one of our important national parks and it will be one more step in the preservation of the environment and the preservation of the natural beauty of Meghalaya. One of the most different aspects of development is to balance economic advancement with the problems that are caused by economic development. Such parks help us maintain the balance but it is very important that those people who have so kindly given the land for this park are looked after in the best possible manner and as speedily as possible. The Bible teaches us to preserve God's creations and that is what we will be doing in this park.' I think this was the first ever use of the Bible by a politician in India in the interests of wildlife! In 1988 at the Ninth Non-Aligned Summit in Belgrade, Rajiv Gandhi spelt out his grand scheme for a Planet Protection Fund: 'With these ends in view, I propose the establishment of a Planet Protection Fund (PPF), under the aegis of the United Nations. The

THE G A N D H I ERA

315

Fund will be used to protect the environment by developing or purchasing conservation-compatible technologies in critical areas which can then be brought into the public domain for the benefit of both developing and developed countries. All technologies over which the Fund acquires rights will be made available gratis, and without restriction, to all constituent members of the Fund. I would wish to stress that contributors to and beneficiaries of the Fund would include not only developing countries but also the industrialised countries. We would wish to work towards universal membership of the Fund. We propose that all constituent members of the Fund, developed and developing, contribute a fixed percentage of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to the Fund, with exemption but full access granted to the least developed countries. The annual contribution to the corpus of the Fund would be around $ 18 billion at as low an average contribution as of 0.1 per cent of GDP. That is, for environment-related work, the international community would have at its disposal as significant a sum as eighteen billion dollars a year, if only each country were willing to part with but a onethousandth part of its GDP. Such a Fund would become the fulcrum for a truly cooperative global endeavour to measure up to a problem of global dimensions and global implications. Such a Fund would be proof of our commitment to saving all creation and our planet Earth.' Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated in 1991. Even though his focus during 1984-9, the years of his prime ministership, on issues concerning forests and wildlife were nowhere near the strength of his mother's, he did manage to sustain an interest and concern in green issues especially concerning the environment. If Indira Gandhi was responsible for the pillar on which all our forest and wildlife policies stand then Rajiv Gandhi as responsible for the pillar on which all our environmental policies stand. Between them they were directly responsible for creating the laws and policies for India's natural resources and environmental concerns. Every political party even today is forced to follow these policies. But no Planet Protection Fund was ever created and by 2002 the

316

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

concerns across the globe for the environment had, in my opinion, declined rapidly. But let us look at the period 1991-2000 which started with Narasimha Rao taking over as prime minister after Rajiv Gandhi's assassination. He was a staunch supporter over decades of the Gandhi family. But he was totally 'ungreen', and the beginning of this decade signified the end of the Nehru-Gandhi era and their legacy to the forests of India. Rao's tenure was the beginning of the end for Forest India. I doubt if Rao even realized this. I saw this era very closely since it was the time I got sucked into the Ministry of Environment and Forests and all the numerous committees that surround it. This is my story of the last decade of the twentieth century.

The End of a Century 1990-2002

T

he year 1989 must have been a strange year in the history of

India's wildlife. I was totally preoccupied following tigers and setting up one of the first non-governmental organizations in Ranthambhore to integrate people and wildlife. After five years Rajiv Gandhi had held a meeting of the Indian Board of Wildlife but by 1991 was tragically assassinated. As the political fabric of the country changed no one knew then that the next meeting of the Board would take place eight years later. I was sure then that I would never be a part of any government process and my idyllic years with tigers would continue. Little did I know what was going to happen. By late 1989 the champions of both forest and wildlife—the Gandhis—had all but vanished from India's political scene. There was a kind of silence that reigned. I was following tigers in Ranthambhore National Park, one of the smallest of the Project Tiger Reserves that were set up in 1973.1 had been doing that and little else since 1975. And it was clear to me that at the end of the 1980s Ranthambhore had become one of the great success stories of the world in tiger conservation. Tigers spilled out of everywhere. I had, in the decade of the 1980s, written three books about wild tigers. Looking back, these were the glorious years of

318

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Indian wildlife—years which had felt the concrete field impact of Indira Gandhi's policies and concerns. In fact sometimes when I visit Ranthambhore today it appears that the 1980s were a different age—another world—a time gone by and difficult even to explain to someone w h o had not experienced it. It was a time when I could see sixteen different tigers in one day. It was in 1988-9 that I got down to the hard w o r k of setting u p an N G O and t r y i n g i n v o l v i n g local communities in the protection of the park—I idealistically believed that the future lay in this work. Many still believe that this is the way forward. I am not so sure any more. It was clear that Narasimha Rao's tenure as prime minister in 1991 started with a complete focus on changing the economic policy to usher in India's new free market economy—and without 'green' concerns. In a way Rao thought he was pursuing Rajiv Gandhi's economic policies that had been started some years ago. And that is true—Rajiv had laid the foundation in the late 1980s to change economic policy. But unlike Rajiv, Rao had no green concerns. Therefore, there would be an enormous negative impact of the new economic policy on Forest India. I thank the lucky stars that Indira Gandhi, in the 1970s and 1980s, had created laws to protect Forest India. What on earth would we have done without them in Rao's tenure? In fact, it was in 1991 that the worst ever amendments to the Wildlife Protection Act took place. The 1991 amendments made it much more complex to notify protected areas, and looking back they were totally counterproductive to our forests and wildlife. India, by 1991, was overhauling its entire system of economic policy to enter the international arena. It was a year of 'money' and money talk which enveloped the country. In Ranthambhore there were endless rumours about poaching. Few wanted to believe them, but in 1992 the arrest of a poacher led to revelations from which it was clear that from late 1990 poaching gangs had wiped out 15-20 tigers and hundreds of other animals. It was a similar state right across India. Everybody worshipped the quickmoney God. They had all climbed on the new gravy train and forests were pulled down and animals killed to bring in the loot. If I look back, it is clear to me that the plunder of Forest India was

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

319

in full swing. Law or no law—there was no commitment of the Prime Minister to the forest and the States were having a field day in their plunder of Forest India and we shall see later how ingeniously it was being done. There were lots of rhetoric but little field action. By 1992, many wept at the absence of the Gandhis and in the hopeless situation that existed, few believed that tigers would survive the turn of the century or that any decent tracts of forest would remain intact. It was all about greed, and the corporate world entered the arena with a vengeance, be it for mining, river valley projects, or anything that could fuel their exploitative desires. From 19921 got sucked into the Ministry of Environment and Forests and ended u p working really closely with the then minister, Kamal Nath. I could not believe this was happening to me. Ranthambhore's poaching crisis had blown up and forced me to enter the area of government and decision-making and all the endless committees that go with it. A friend of my father's had taken me to see the minister and soon after that the ministry gobbled me up. From the steering committee of Project Tiger to the Indian Board for Wildlife to the Tiger Crisis Cell to the expert committee on River Valley Projects to international conferences on the tiger. I was doing hundreds of things in an eighteen-hour working day. It was crisis time and much like being engaged in a battle. I did not have time to realize where it would all lead to. Minister Kamal Nath was on the surface all support. He made some of us—the NGOs—all-powerful in the Ministry. In a way, without the Gandhis we were all dependant on the political will and power of the Minister of Environment and Forests. And 19923 were tough years. The seizures of skins and bones of tigers made headlines across the world. They were enormous seizures and the mechanisms of government were ineffectual to counter this menace. We, as a bunch of conservationists, ran around like headless chickens. We thought that we were making a difference. Looking back I doubt if we did. I remember the enormous pressure created after the expose of the Ranthambhore poaching incident in the media. We fuelled the process to force decisions. Finally a meeting was arranged for me with the Chief Minister. He was very clever. He flew me to

320

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Jaipur in his little plane. What a frightening experience. It was during the monsoons, and I thought we would definitely crash. When we finally arrived in Jaipur I was asked to explain to a meeting of bureaucrats the reality of the situation. I did so in the Chief Minister's office. Soon after I was told to go to Ranthambhore and bring in correctives. But it was all hogwash. Even though the then chief minister had been a good friend of my father, all his efforts were only to neutralize my critique, and he probably succeeded for a short while. The crisis was bigger than all of us and the impotent institutions that existed. A brief picture of these early years comes from a piece written by Geoffrey C. Ward entitled 'Massacre': 'In late June 19921 received a letter and a set of newspaper clippings from Fateh [Fateh Singh Rathore]. Several poachers had been arrested at Ranthambhore; they had confessed to the police that they had shot more than fifteen tigers there over the past two years. And they were not alone. Several other poaching gangs, they said, were at work in and around the park. Rumours of tiger poaching had swirled around Ranthambhore since 1990, but the Chief Wildlife Warden of the state had dismissed them all as 'baseless', 'the products of vested interests' (by which he seems mostly to have meant Fateh, without a job again and noisily unhappy at what was happening to the sanctuary he still considered his). Some 31,000 tourists, more than half of them foreigners, visited the park during the winter of 1990-91, an all-time record, and a good many complained that they had seen no signs of tigers, let alone the tigers themselves. Noon—the tigress that had mastered the technique of killing in the lakes, the animal I had watched, feeding with her cubs, in the grass two years earlier—seemed suddenly to be missing. So was the magnificent tiger called the Bokhala male. So were other individual animals well known to Fateh and Valmik [Thapar] and to the guides and jeep drivers who made locating tigers their business. A story about the mysterious dearth of tiger sightings at Ranthambhore appeared in the Indian Express in February 1992. The field director claimed there was nothing to worry about; because

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

321

of an unusually heavy monsoon the previous summer, the tigers were simply keeping to the hills. In March, the erstwhile Maharani of Jaipur, whose hunting reserve Ranthambhore once had been, also expressed her concern. She, too, was told nothing was wrong, and when the census was taken that summer, sure enough, the official total was forty-five tigers, one more than had been claimed the year before. Fateh made more trouble for himself by publicly denouncing its accuracy: If there were that many tigers why weren't they being seen? He was sure there weren't more than twenty tigers left in the park. The rumours persisted. During our visit to Ranthambhore that winter, the corpse of Badhiya, a forest guard who had been one of the most knowledgeable and dedicated members of the forest staff, was found sprawled along the railroad tracks outside the park. There were whispers he'd been murdered because he knew too much about poaching. Something was very wrong. Even the Forest Department began to worry, and when the census was undertaken the following May, Valmik Thapar was asked to help conduct it. The results were devastating: he could find concrete evidence of only seventeen tigers in the park, and tentative evidence suggesting there might be three more. Again, the Chief Wildlife Warden denied everything. The census was faulty, he insisted, botched by the same amateurs he himself had asked for help. But then came the arrests. Gopal Moghiya, a member of a traditional hunting tribe who ordinarily worked as watchman for local herdsmen, was seized by the Sawai Madhopur Police, along with the skin and bones of a freshly killed tiger he had shot. Fateh was devastated: Geoff, it is a massacre [he wrote]. When the police chief showed me the skin, I could not control myself. Tears were rolling down my cheeks. He had to take me away. It's heartbreaking and sometimes I feel guilty that I taught them to have faith in human beings. ... All the tigers were shot at point-blank range, just innocently looking at the man with the gun.... Everyday some bad news is coming. ... Somebody shot a tiger two years ago

322

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and somebody else shot one three months before that. It shows that nobody bothered about these animals. I called Fateh. He was again in tears. 'I sometimes think it was my fault,' he shouted over the long-distance line. 'I taught my tigers not to fear people and see how they have been repaid.' Gopal Moghiya's confession led to the arrests of several others, including his own brother, a Muslim butcher, and four Meena herdsmen who admitted killing four tigers to protect their livestock. Again, the Forest Department's initial instinct was to cover things up. One or two animals might have been killed, it said, but poaching on such a large scale was impossible. (Gopal Moghiya did eventually recant his confession, yet he had airily bragged of his poaching skills to several disinterested journalists before doing so.) But the facts could not be denied: eighteen tigers and leopards were already gone from Sariska, perhaps twenty tigers missing at Ranthambhore, and reports of more poaching were filtering in from everywhere. In Uttar Pradesh, for example, where the Forest Department stubbornly insisted that Dudhwa and its adjacent forest still held one hundred and four tigers, Billy [Arjan Singh] estimated there were now no more than twenty. Valmik did a hasty calculation of the total number of tigers thought to have been poached, based on just five years' worth of official seizures of skins and skeletons. It came to one hundred and twenty animals. And it seems reasonable to assume that several times as many more went unreported. At that rate, the Indian tiger is surely on its way out. (So, evidently, is the Nepalese: Twenty-five tigers disappeared from the Royal Chitawan Reserve between 1998 and 1990 alone, so large a percentage of the park's resident population that it may be impossible for it ever to recover.) Tigers have always been poached. Villagers poison them to protect themselves or their livestock, and some skin smuggling has continued despite an international ban on the trade. But compared to the twin menaces of expanding population and dwindling habitat) poaching has been a relatively minor threat to the tiger's survival.

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

323

Now that has changed. If allowed to continue at its current pace, poaching will swiftly undo whatever good Project Tiger has managed to do over the past two decades. The immediate crisis was caused by the peculiar demands of Chinese medicine. For hundreds, perhaps thousands of years, tiger bones and other tiger by-products have played an important part in Chinese healing. The catalogue of physical ills which tiger bones and the elixirs brewed from them are supposed to cure includes rheumatism, convulsions, scabies, boils, dysentery, ulcers, typhoid, malaria, even prolapse of the anus. Tiger remedies are also said to alleviate fright, nervousness, and possession by devils. Ground tiger bone scattered on the roof is believed to bar demons and end nightmares for those who sleep beneath it. A miraculous medicine made from tiger bone and sold in Vietnam and elsewhere promises '6 love makings a night to give birth to 4 sons'. The demand for these products is enormous, not only in China and Taiwan, but in South Korea and in Chinese communities throughout South-east Asia and some Western communities as well. A single brewery in Taiwan imports 2,000 kg of tiger bones a year, perhaps 150 tigers' worth, from which it brews 100,000 bottles of tiger-bone wine. The Chinese themselves have finally run out of tigers. Wild populations that once ran into thousands have been reduced to fewer than one hundred animals and so they have begun importing tiger bones on a massive scale, ignoring the complaints of conservationists and willing to pay prices smugglers find irresistible. From the Indian reserves where tribal hunters are paid a pittance to take the risks and do the actual killing shadowy middlemen, perhaps with the connivance of some Forest Department and police officials, spirit the bones of poached tigers northward across the Nepal border, then on into Tibet and China. More because of the inefficiency of this process, evidently, than out of concern for the wildlife of other countries, the Chinese have set up a tiger-breeding farm near Beijing. There, using Siberian tigers obtained from North American zoos, they are now raising carnivores whose only raison d'etre is to be disassembled, ground up, and sold

324

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

to clients at home and abroad. Its managers predict they'll have bred some two thousand tigers in the next seven years, and they have recently asked the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species for a permit to peddle their tiger products overseas. 'If we don't get the permit,' one official told a visitor to the breeding farm, 'we'll just kill all the tigers.' Sentiment aside, some urge that the Chinese breeding programme should be encouraged since its success might relieve the pressure on dwindling wild populations. Opponents argue that farms will never be able to provide enough tigers to satisfy Chinese demands, while legitimizing trade in tiger products would only make it easier for poachers and smugglers to continue their deadly work. The Ranthambhore scandal could not have come at a worse time for Project Tiger. The year 1993 was to be its twentieth anniversary, and a celebration was already planned at which a brand new national census figure was to be announced: 4,300 animals, almost two-and-a-half times the number there had been when the project began. All the old problems still persisted. The hostility of local people had intensified: arsonists had recently set fires raging through the hearts of Kanha and Nagarahole, where KM. Chinnappa, the ranger responsible for defending it for so long, had been forced to flee for his life. And there was already one disturbing new problem, a sad side effect of the national struggle with sectional and ethnic separatists that threatens to tear apart the Indian Union. Armed militants of one kind or another had taken shelter in seven of the nineteen reserves, intimidating forest staff, slaughtering animals for fun or food or profit, making a mockery of the parks' supposed inviolability. Now, massive poaching has been added to that already bleak mix. A three-day International Symposium on the Tiger was to be held in New Delhi in February 1993. Nearly two hundred and fifty delegates were coming from every region of India and many parts of the world, and the government's more strident critics predicted little more than a desperate exercise in defensiveness. They were wrong. The new all-India census figure of4,300 was bravely announced, though almost no one believed it; 3,000 tigers

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

325

seems a far more realistic figure, according to most of those with whom I spoke, and even that may now be far too high. And the delegates were made to sit through an appallingly self-congratulatory film: 'Forest cover is increasing' the narrator intoned. 'The tiger reigns supreme'; and in the reserves, 'all is well'. Everyone in the hall already knew that all was anything but well, and for the first time in my experience Indian government officials were willing to say so in front of one another and in public. The Forest Secretary, R. Rajamani, set the tone of candour: 'The anniversary conference,' he said, 'should be an occasion for introspection, not celebration.' For three full days, the tiger's champions talked and argued and agreed to disagree. Billy had come all the way from Dudhwa, looking out of place as he always does once he leaves his jungle. 'I don't know which will outlast the other, the tiger or me,' he said with a grin. I told him my money was on him. Fateh was there, too, newly reinstated in the Forest Department by the courts. 'I have my dignity back,' he said—but relegated for the moment to a desk job. He kept his trademark Stetson on inside the assembly hall, and, while delivering a paper on the problems of censusing tigers, mimicked in cunning pantomime a forest guard trying to trace a pug mark when he had never before held a pencil. Ullas Karanth, the researcher from Nagarahole, eagerly shook the hands of Billy and Fateh and other Tiger-Wallahs he had only read about, and lobbied hard for a more scientific approach to tiger management. Research should be free and unfettered, he said; India needed objective facts upon which to make its hard decisions. ValmikThapar seemed to be everywhere, delivering a battery of papers, demanding complete honesty about poaching and other potential embarrassments, and vowing to defend those forest officials willing to bring them to the public's attention. Everyone seemed to agree that a much greater effort had to be made to involve local people in the creation and management of parks. The poaching crisis would never have occurred had local people felt they had any stake in the tiger's survival. And both Central

326

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and state governments seemed serious about undertaking ambitious eco-development projects—electricity, water, alternative forms of fuel—to provide benefits at last to the people who live in and around the parks. Some plans seemed so ambitious, in fact, that Ullas Karanth gently pointed out that the government already had access to 96 per cent of the country on which to experiment with economic uplift, and might do better to leave alone the mere 4 per cent left over for wildlife while one field director suggested that before government came to the aid of the herdsmen he'd been trying to keep out of his park, he hoped it would at least provide trousers for his forest guards. There was also a good deal of what seemed to me to be very romantic talk about the importance of maintaining intact the ancient 'sustainable lifestyles' of the tribal peoples who live in and around the besieged reserves. I couldn't help but remember the gujjars whose herds I'd seen avidly eating up what was left of Rajaji National Park. Their lifestyle was ancient all right, but it was no longer remotely 'sustainable'; if Rajaji is to survive, some creative alternative will have to be found for them. If it is not found, the forest will vanish, and so will they. And though every park is unique, it is hard for me to see how the same won't ultimately be true for most if not all of the people now living within India's reserves. In any case, I left the Delhi conference in better spirits than I had expected. The poaching crisis had brought together the tigers' most eloquent advocates. They were talking to one another now, working together instead of on their own, for the first time more united than divided. Before flying home to the States, we wanted to revisit Ranthambhore and Dudhwa once again. It had been five years since I had sat on the roof of Valmik's farmhouse watching the village women heading home while he tentatively outlined his plans for the Ranthambhore Foundation. I had been sympathetic then, but privately unconvinced that the hard scrabbly landscape around his home could ever be coaxed back to life, let alone that the gulf between wildlife enthusiasts and villagers might one day be breached. I could not have been more wrong. Valmik's house is now the heart of a green oasis, alive with birds and small animals, shaded by

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

327

some fifty species of trees, many of them native varieties grown from seeds gathered in the forest. A lush nursery grows 500,000 seedlings for villagers to plant during the monsoon. And a cluster of outbuildings behind the house constitutes a full-scale demonstration farm: a sleek, stall-fed murrah buffalo, already the father of hundreds of handsome progeny scattered through nearby villages; a herd of cross-bred cattle whose milk yield is ten times that of the ordinary Indian cow; heat for cooking provided by a biogas plant powered by the animals' dung. Just down the road, village women of all castes and faiths meet in their own handsome, mud-walled building, producing handicrafts which provide needed extra income to some sixty households. Villagers from as far as fifteen miles away are asking for seeds with which to reforest their land. In at least two villages, the people themselves have formed Forest Protection societies with nurseries of their own. The people of Sherpur, Valmik's nearest neighbours, asked for and then helped dig a cattle ditch two kilometres long so that their approach to Ranthambhore at least can be made as green again as it was in the time of their ancestors. From Ranthambhore, we returned to Delhi, then made the long drive to Dudhwa to visit Billy. The court cases against him seemed at least momentarily forgotten, and late one afternoon, he did something he only rarely does these days: he accompanied us into the park. Dudhwa seemed especially handsome as dusk approached and as we drove through the red-brown grass—tiger-stripped by the smoke from fires deliberately set to char the undergrowth and allow fresh green shoots to spread for the deer to eat—thousands of swallows and bee-eaters tumbled through the air in pursuit of their evening meal. But the few animals we saw—chital, a herd of thirty swamp deer, a lone sambar calf somehow separated from its mother—seemed frantic with fear, plunging deeper into the forest as soon as they spotted us, evidence perhaps that they had recently been shot at from vehicles that resembled ours. And only once, along all the miles of dusty road we travelled, did we see a set of tiger pug marks.

328

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Gloom seemed almost palpably to settle around Billy's shoulders as we turned off the metalled road that leads out of the park and on to the rutted track to Tiger Haven that runs for two kilometres along the Neora. The sun was hanging very low in the sky now, and as we came around a bend in the river, wisps of mist rose from the elephant grass and its damp sweet smell filled our nostrils. A big male tiger lay motionless atop the riverbank, fifty feet across the river, his brassy coat burnished by the dying sun, his opaque eye fixed upon us. I stole a look at Billy as he watched the tiger. It seemed almost an invasion of his privacy. Head cocked to one side, smiling, he was rapt, adoring, his face lit up as if he had unexpectedly come upon lover. The tiger gazed back at him for a time, then rose slowly to his feet and—stretched out to an almost unbelievable length, belly nearly touching the ground—slipped into the underbrush and disappeared. Under Billy's vigilant eye, this tiger, at least, still occupies his range, still reminds us of what will be lost if the new hopes stirred at the Delhi conference are allowed to die away. As the Land Rover started up again. Billy beamed at me and raised one thick thumb in silent delight.' Geoffrey C. Ward, Tiger Wallas: Encounters with the Men who Tried to Serve the Greatest of the Great Cats.

From 1992 to 20001 worked as hard as I humanly could. I visited, on various missions, more than thirty protected areas in India, wrote 286 notes, papers, and interventions to the different ministers that came, and to one of the prime ministers I had known from my childhood. I even h a n d e d the prime minister 320 signatures of members of Parliament who had all signed for radical change in the policy to save the tiger and the forest. Of course, Parliament dissolved a month later and little happened. But no stone was left unturned. In between government missions, committees, and endless rhetoric with ministers I directed the N G O I had founded, Ranthambhore Foundation, and completed three more books and over a dozen films for the BBC as a presenter

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

329

and a voice, and life was as full as it could be. I also wrote scores of articles. I believed somewhere that good information is the bullet for effective conservation. So books, films, articles, and the media are vital to inform and create both public and political will. So I went on much like a steam engine that never nans out of steam. But success in the interventions I made, remained elusive. I learnt a huge amount about the horrors that afflict the system. In a way it stunned me. I wrote something about these years and how the systems in place abused itself and distorted the objectives of the law. 'To reveal the inability of both the Centre and state governments to function in the interest of wildlife, I shall examine in detail the example of one state. Madhya Pradesh is supposed to have excellent forest cover, the maximum number of tigers in India, and, on paper, the political will to translate policy into field action. MP had nearly 30 per cent of forest cover and 15 per cent of the world's tigers. From the period starting 1992, I shall try and highlight specific examples of policy- and decision-making. In 1992, the Minister for Environment and Forests was closely linked to the man who was to be the future chief minister of Madhya Pradesh. They could have been the most effective duo for protecting the natural heritage of Madhya Pradesh. Our story starts in 1992, when a tract of forest that fell in the minister's constituency was declared a Project Tiger reserve. One thought that the minister would set an example and make Pench a model for our tiger reserves. I had just been appointed to the steering committee of Project Tiger and was beginning to learn the ways of the system that govern the natural heritage of this country. Fishing was prohibited in Pench as it was a national park and therefore covered by the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The following clause of the Act applied to the area: 'No person shall destroy, exploit, or remove any wildlife from a National Park, or destroy or damage the habitat of any wild animal, or deprive any wildlife animal of its habitat within such National Park except under and in accordance with a permit granted by the

330

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Chief Wildlife Warden and no such permit shall be granted unless the state government, being satisfied that such destruction, exploitation, or removal of wildlife from the National Park is necessary for the improvement and better management of wildlife therein, authorises the issue of such permit.' But we have become masters of using the law and the grey areas in it, and the above clause 35(6) of the Wildlife Protection Act has been much abused. In this case a joint secretary in the ministry of environment and forests initiated a process and faxed the principal forest secretary of Madhya Pradesh, stating in relation to the rights of fishermen: As per information available in this ministry, the aforesaid formalities have not been duly completed in respect of Pench National Park and the final notification is yet to issue. If so, fishing rights of the local people cannot be abridged without compensation and lawful acquisition and would have to be continued till the formalities laid down for acquisition of rights are completed.' This fax message was like a missile for the state government and they must have wondered if the makers of the law were turning into the breakers of the law. After all, everyone knew that it was only ten years ago that a dam was constructed in the area and 50 sq. km of forest cleared for the water reservoir in the heart of the national park. Since this was so recent, there was no question of any traditional fisherman or traditional fishing rights in this entire expanse. But the Central government had opened up a hornets nest as far as the issue of rights was concerned and questioned the very basis of the national park. It was all about the millions of dollars worth of fish in the water reservoir and every fishing mafia in India wanted their bite offlesh,whether through 'traditional' fishing rights or any other way. The lobbies had begun to work, taking their cue from the Ministry of Environment and Forests' first message. For over two years this issue went back and forth between the Central and state governments, since to permit fishing under the laws of this country was not easy. Towards the end of 1993, a new chief minister of Madhya Pradesh was in the saddle. But in the

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

331

interim period the Minister of Environment and Forests had made all the right noises. In September 1992 he wrote to the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh: 'Madhya Pradesh can boast of the single largest population of tigers in the world (more than 900), which constitutes one-fourth of the country's, and one-sixth of the world's wild population of tiger. Three-fourth of the 45 districts have substantial forest cover. Madhya Pradesh could rightly be called the "Tiger State". I have been discussing this with some experts, including members of the Steering Committee of Project Tiger and other wildlife lovers. I feel that we could develop a whole new approach for the conservation of biological diversity and natural resources, as well as the socio-economic development of people, particularly tribals and forest dwellers in Madhya Pradesh by using tiger conservation as a means.' We have become masters of rhetoric. The chief minister accepted the concept and created a state tiger committee, to which I was appointed, to work out a detailed strategy paper. By 1995 the process was well underway—Madhya Pradesh was declared the tiger state and was to adopt all-round policies friendly to tigers, including setting up a tiger cell which was formed at the police headquarters to deal with poaching and illegal trade. A lot of excellent rhetoric spewed out over the next year. Both the Minister of Environment and Forests and the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh wrote splendid responses on different issues, but it was all paper work without any field action. To a detailed proposal prepared by a colleague and myself on what the tiger state should be doing, the Chief Minister responded: 'I thankfully acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 5 September 1995. The concern expressed in your letter, certainly, strengthens our resolve to intensify the efforts in the protection and preservation of wildlife and particularly of the tiger in Madhya Pradesh. Due to limitations of financial resources, I understand that some of the recommendations made by the Tiger State Committee could not be

332

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

implemented so far. However, arrangements are being made to provide better communication facilities such as fax machine in the office of the Addl. PCCF (Wildlife). Wireless sets have already been provided to the National Parks. The authorisation for the use of fire arms by the forest staff in sensitive areas are being examined, on priority. The formation of the Tiger Cell in the PHQ and the coordinated efforts being made by the police and the forest officers at the field level have turned the heat on the poachers. We intend to keep up this pressure without any relent. The ChiefWildlife Warden, Madhya Pradesh informs me that the next meeting of the Tiger State Committee is being planned in October 1995. This forum should enable you to interact more closely with the other members of the committee as well as officers of the forest and police departments in giving further shape to the anti-poaching drive. I look forward to your continued support on this noble cause and welcome suggestions for improving our approach in this endeavour.' We only managed to get one fax machine for the chief wildlife warden's office! The Union minister also gave some splendid suggestions to the Chief Minister. In a letter in May 1995 he stated: 'Here are some immediate steps we could take. (a) Dramatically step up intelligence, patrolling and arrests to force the gangs to suspend operations till we have time to regroup our efforts to stamp out the menace. (b) Place all known and habitual wildlife poachers under arrest and oppose their release on bail. (c) Consult with the Chief Wildlife Warden before transfer of any forest or police officer serving in a tiger area, or involved with the M.P. Tiger State Committee, because sometimes, by pure coincidence, a transfer takes place immediately after a seizure and this conveys the wrong signal that the poaching mafia has influence in high places. (d) Consult the Law Department on the possibility of codification of firearms for forest staff so that the 800 weapons lying in the armouries can be used by them against poachers. We should

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

333

also instruct them to brief us on the feasibility of enhancing punishment in the acts to a minimum of ten years of imprisonment, making the offence non-bailable. I am instructing my officers to advice me along the same lines for central legislation. (e) Issue instructions to all territorial DFO's and CF's about prioritising the protection of the tiger. CWLW must be authorised to make entries in the confidential report of these personnel, in addition to the normal channels. (f) Allot four HF frequencies to the Wildlife Wing for better communication, and two DFO's and ACF's must be posted at the CWLW office in Bhopal for anti-poaching and strengthening tiger management. (g) Resource mobilisation must be immediately begun, particularly to acquire vehicles, fire-protection equipment and for reward schemes for informers. On my part, I have immediately instituted similar steps at the Centre and will see to it that coordinated action is taken by the Tiger Crisis Cell at the Centre and the Tiger Cell of Madhya Pradesh. The back of the poaching gangs must be broken within the next four weeks, but I would like to ensure that the focus does not fall merely on the weakest link which happens to be the adivasis who actually use the poison or traps. We must get to the very top, or at least break the transport and trade links between Mandla, Jabalpur, Balaghat and Seoni.' Unfortunately, all of the above remained hot air. Nothing has happened till today. Recommendations piled up but the resultant field action was zero. Meanwhile, the 'fishing' issue resurfaced, and against the advice of the entire steering committee of Project Tiger, the boss of wildlife in India, the additional IGF (Wildlife) wrote a letter to the principal forest secretary of MP in January 1995: 'We have been receiving several representations from people engaged in fishing in theTotladoh reservoir of Pench Tiger Reserve (soon to be declared as national park). The complaints are of two types:

334

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

On the other hand, it would not be appropriate to snatch away certain activities of hill and poor people, which may ultimately help in the improvement of biodiversity of the protected area so that the traditional atmosphere of conflict between the park management and the local residents be replaced by a more cooperative interface. The solutions to be adopted would, of course, have to be location-specific; in different sanctuaries and parks, the problems would be different, the biodiversity would be different, the priorities would be different, and therefore, the solutions too would differ. In Pench Tiger Reserve, the Totladoh reservoir is an artificial one created due to the completion of a dam downstream about eight years ago. This is not an in situ lake. So if any use of bio-resource of the pond could ultimately help in the improvement and better management of the reserve, by reducing their dependence on illegal felling of trees and poaching of wild animals, and also increasing the interface of local people with the park authorities—this may be explored as envisioned in Section 35(6) of the Wildlife Protection Act.' Note that the boss of Indian wildlife was now not even calling the Pench Tiger Reserve a national park. He was talking of a 50 sq. km reservoir as a pond, and in writing he was asking the state government to explore the loopholes in Section 35(6) of the Wildlife Protection Act of which he was a critical functionary. Over the next six months many members of the steering committee of Project Tiger wrote letters opposing this move. But the then director, Project Tiger, failed to support his steering committee. At an evening function, he went up to the minister and remarked, 'I am glad fishing will commence in the tiger reserve— the World Bank will welcome it.' Since part of the reservoir falls in neighbouring Maharashtra, the Government of Maharashtra took legal opinion and wrote to the state of Madhya Pradesh objecting to the entire happening: 'In 1975 the Government of Maharashtra vide its resolution No. PGS-1375/121748-F1 dt. 22/11/1975 has declared its intention to constitute an area of 257.26 sq kms as a national park to be known

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

335

as Pench National Park. The area of submergence as explained in (1) above is included in this notification. The Law and Judiciary Department of Government of Maharashtra has given the opinion that all the provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 apply to the intended national park also. The provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, and The Wildlife Protection Act 1972, in relation to fishing in the reserved forest and national park, respectively, are as follows: As per 26(d) of the IFA, trespassing in a reserved forest is prohibited. As per 26(i) of the IFA, fishing in reserved forest is prohibited. As per Section 65(A) of the IFA, offences under (i) are non-bailable. As per section 23 of the IFA, no prescriptive rights accrue over reserved forest except by succession etc. As per Section 35(3) read with Section 20 of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972, after the issue of notification of intended national park, no fresh rights accrue over such area. As per Section 35(6) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, destruction or removal of any wildlife or destruction or damage to habitat of any wild animal is prohibited except the activity beneficial to wildlife management. From the above clarifications it would become clear that the submergence area of the reservoir is not only a reserved forest but is also a part of intended Pench National Park. Therefore fishing in the reservoir becomes violative of the provisions of both, the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and is liable for penal action under both the Acts.' However, none of this was of any use, and on 30 May 1996 the Chief Wildlife Warden of MP issued an order granting 305 fishing permits in the heart of the Pench Tiger Reserve. In his order he stated that he had been instructed by the Chief Minister to do so. The Maharashtra government once again strongly opposed this move, stating that the Madhya Pradesh government's interpretation of the Wildlife Protection Act was different from theirs. As a result two rules applied to the same water reservoir in which no fishing was permitted in Maharashtra while fishing was permitted in Madhya Pradesh. It was the perfect recipe for the mafia to force

336

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

open the entire area and stir the activists into demanding their fishing rights. All the vested interests in exploiting the area had been perfectly massaged into action. From the Centre, even the office of Project Tiger bent over backwards to use the grey areas and rationalise the 'fishing rights' of poor people. My opposition to this move was not appreciated and a senior official in the ministry whispered, 'District records can always be tampered with to create fishing rights.' I could not believe it. Suddenly the minister changed, I continued my opposition to what had happened in Pench and on the basis of my letter, the same boss of wildlife (now under a different minister) wrote to the Principal Secretary of Forests, Madhya Pradesh: 'I am not sure about the authenticity of the statement made by CWLW, Madhya Pradesh. I understand a large part of Pench Tiger Reserve is a reserved forest; no right of any individual can exist unless the same is recorded at the time of reservation process. Such record or reference is normally reflected in the volume-I of the working plan prescription in the chapter that deals with rights and concessions of the local people. It may, thus be indicated whether any such right was recorded in the Pench Reserved Forest at the time of constitution of the reserved forest. The demand for fishing in Pench is mostly coming after the Pench dam was constructed, may be about 10 or 15 years back. I am sure that such demands cannot be age old as the reservoir was not in existence earlier. So even if the final notification of the national park is pending and the process under Sections 19 to 26 of Wildlife Protection Act is yet to be gone through, the control of rights can easily be made with reference to the records of the working plan and admission or inadmission of such rights at the time of constitution of the reservation of forest, pending final notification of the national park. Minister, Environment and Forests has pursued the note of CWLW dated 10 July 1996 and he has observed that the remarks are evasive and ambiguous. I would, therefore, request you to furnish a specific reply in this regard within 10 August 1996 after which the

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

337

case will again be placed to Minister, Environment and Forests for his orders.' The same officer, under a different minister, had taken a somersault, but this time the MP government was not going to be caught with its pants down. In a tough reply to the ministry (the first of its kind in ministry records) the Additional Secretary (Forests) of MP wrote to the boss of wildlife, the Additional IGF (Wildlife): 'The perusal of the above letter makes it abundantly clear that the matter of traditional rights of fishermen was raised for the first time by the Government of India and it was at the specific instructions of the Government of India that the state government examined the matter in the light of Section 35(6) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. For ready reference a copy of fax dt. 15/7/92 ofJoint Secretary, Gol, Mr. S.S. Hasurkar and your letter dt. 17/1/1995 is enclosed herewith. It is clear from the perusal of these letters that at that point of time, the state government was in favour of stopping fishing in Pench National Park area and was acting accordingly. But the state was compelled to change this stand due to Gol's instructions.' A similar letter went from the Chief Wildlife Warden to Project Tiger, Delhi. Because of the differences between the Centre and state, and the interstate problems over the use of the reservoir, the matter ended up in the Supreme Court. Everybody was against fishing—the state wildlife advisory board, the steering committee of Project Tiger, and many other NGOs. As the Supreme Court debated the issue, activist organisations joined hands in support of fishing, and the poor fishermen appeared in and out of court. The mafia lobbies, politicians, and bureaucrats were thrilled that the tribal organisations stood on the same platform as them. I remember a senior aide in the minister's office telling me: 'You see now how others can be engaged to fight the battle.' In all this confusion, the Supreme Court supported Maharashtra's ban on fishing, but permitted 305 fishing permits to continue in Madhya Pradesh till the final notification of the area. They also made a long list of stringent conditions under which fishing could be done. Now India had one large reservoir declared as a

338

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

national park, administered by two state governments, in which fishing was banned in one half of the area and permitted in the other half! India's Wildlife Protection Act had been interpreted in two different ways for the same stretch of water. The field director of Pench Tiger Reserve and his deputy were transferred for having done their duty to control illegal fishing. The new director of Project Tiger objected to the transfer, but now the state government was in no mood to listen to the Central government. And though the Supreme Court had asked for immediate final notification of the area, two years later nothing has happened. In fact, there is immense pressure by fishing mafias on the Maharashtra government to open up the area to fishing, following the precedent of Madhya Pradesh. It is one big mess. The tiger state leads all the states in the Union in its quest for diverting forest lands. Let us look at some of the terrible violations that have taken place. A request was made by the state to release 3,000 hectares of forest land from the Shivpuri forest division for a hydroelectric project. The proposal was examined and cleared by the Ministry of Environment and Forests. After all, the original application for this clearance from Madhya Pradesh clearly stated that in 1994 the Chief Wildlife Warden of the state considered the area to have no wildlife of any significance. Further, the divisional forest officer recommended the diversion, even though Rs 5 crore worth of trees was listed as the value. But the matter was much more serious since all these were official comments on a national park! The land in question also included a portion of Madhav National Park. The MP government, instead of clarifying this in its original application, had only stated 'Shivpuri forest division, and legal status as 'P.F. and R.F.' (which means protected forest and reserved forest). There was no mention of the national park! Nearly every fact sheet from Madhya Pradesh requesting the release of forest land states that 'wildlife is of no significance'. This is how the Forest Department serves our natural treasury. Little did the Central government realise that 1,500 hectares of this land had been notified as Madhav National Park. I discovered this fact on a visit to look at a dam site and the violations taking place in the

r

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

339

construction work. They immediately tried to stop the release when I brought it to their notice. In a letter to me, the additional IGF (Wildlife) wrote: 'It is revealed that the permission granted for transfer of forest land for Sindh, Mohini Sagar Phase-II Hydro Electric Project was obtained by the Madhya Pradesh government without informing that the land forms part of the national park. Once it came to the notice of the Central government that the land proposed for transfer is within the national park, the project was rejected and the state government was asked to fix the responsibility against the erring official.' But the Government of India had been totally fooled, and in the intervening period the irrigation project had spent more than Rs. 80 crore, damaging the forest land in question which had just under 5,00,000 trees. Even today the state government is least bothered about the Central government ban on the Sindh Phase-II project, and continues its work in the national park and on forest land. One of the most serious violations of the laws that govern our natural heritage had been detected, but how many go undetected? In the same Shivpuri forest division, other violations resulting from the permission to mine inside the national park have added fuel to the fire and degraded both forest and wildlife in the area. I strongly objected to the permission given by the ministry to operate seven mines in 930 hectares of park area inside the Madhav National Park. Please note that in a clever usage of words, both the state government and the Ministry of Environment and Forests referred to the land as the 'proposed extension area of Madhav National Park'. Someone in the corridors of power had ingeniously coined a new phrase to describe a national park. There is no such thing as a proposed extension area of a national park. When it is convenient the same government that notifies a national park can end up calling the park 'a proposed extension area'. My objection to the mining was based on a letter dated December 1995 from the ministry:

340

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

'Sub: (i) Renewal of mining lease over an area of 930.734 ha. of forest land in district of Shivpuri. (ii) Permission for removal of existing material and completion of mining operations in the forest areas already broken up in respect of 7 mines within the proposed extension area of Madhav National Park. Sir, I am directed to refer to the Chief Minister, Madhya Pradesh D.O. letter No.4337/CMS/95 dated 1.11.95 addressed to the Minister (Environment and Forests) regarding above mentioned subject and to say that as a very special case this Ministry has decided to grant permission up 31st March 1996 only for removal of existing material and completion of mining operations in already broken up area in respect of 7 mines located in the proposed extension area of Madhav National Park subject to the condition that the state government will relocate the mines outside the national park in the alternate areas within the period of this temporary permission. It is requested that during the period of temporary permission, the concerned officials may be directed to keep a strict vigil so that no fresh forest area is broken up during this period. It will be pertinent to mention here that regional office, Bhopal vide letter addressed to Chief Conservator of Forests (Land Management and F.C.), government of Madhya Pradesh has pointed out that mining activities were being continued in some fresh forest areas which were not broken up earlier. This should not have been allowed to reoccur. It is also clarified that no further extension of temporary working permission from the state government will be entertained in future.' Under no law in this country could the above clearance be given. It was obvious that there was a strong connection between the lessees of the mines and powerful politicians. And believe it or not, the 'special permissions' continued. This is indicated by a letter dated 14th May 1996, 'As a very special case this Ministry had decided to grant permission up to 30th June 1996...'. Only in 1997 did the mining stop after the area was totally devastated. How could the Central government issue such orders and under which law? To my objection, the Inspector General (Forests) in the ministry replied:

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

341

'The decision to grant temporary working permission up to June, 1996 in respect of 7 mines located in proposed extension area of Madhav National Park has been taken after careful examination of all the issues including hardships to local labourers engaged in the mines. It will be pertinent to mention that this permission is only for removal of existing material and completion of mining operations over already broken up forest area and more importantly subject to the condition of relocation of these mines outside the national park within this period, so that the interest of the wildlife and labourers employed in these quarries can be safeguarded simultaneously.' I could not believe it and hence in a letter to the IG (Forests) it was clarified that the area was reserved forest, national park land, and that it was illegal for the ministry to allow mining or removal of materials irrespective of the feelings of the labourers. Also, if the feelings of the labourers working in illegal mines were so important to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, they should have found alternative employment schemes for them. I never got another reply. In other cases, land from protected areas was being palmed off for irrigation projects which were totally in violation of the law. Forty hectares of land were given from Pachmarhi Sanctuary and a similar amount from Noradehi Sanctuary. I asked under which law was land from protected areas being given to irrigation projects. I knew that under the Wildlife Protection Act the only way this was possible was by denotification through a majority vote in the state legislative assembly. The reply: 'As regards the Amadehi Tank project in Pachmarhi forests, the Chief Wildlife Warden, Madhya Pradesh has given a categorical certificate that the proposed transfer of land would not affect the wildlife of Pachmarhi Sanctuary and accordingly the proposal was approved vide this Ministry's letter dated 17.7.92. Now the letter dated 13.8.96 of CWLW, M.P. objecting the release of land 4 years after the land has already been released, was sent to the Government of M.P. for their comments. You are also apprised of the situation in the matter earlier. The CWLW has certified that the area proposed does not form habitat of any migrating fauna or breeding ground and has

342

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

recommended the proposal. Area approved in the case is 30.76 ha forest land which as per the CWLW, M.P. falls outside the boundary of Noradehi Wildlife Sanctuary.' How many cases exist where land from protected areas is given away without having any legal basis? It is a nightmare of violations that pile up in thefileswhile our forests vanish each year. Political will to protect wildlife was absent, and when the Central government did not accept the 'proposed diversion', the MP legislative assembly denotified the area. One hundred sixty hectares of Ghatigaon Great Indian Bustard Sanctuary were denotified by the legislative assembly for a railway line in 1993. Today this area has few signs of any wildlife. So much for the tiger state. There are many ways to lose forest cover legally, but probably the most ingenious one was exemplified by the sal borer episode which ravaged the only viable tiger corridor link between Kanha National Park and eastern Madhya Pradesh. The sal borer is an insect that lives and breeds in the sal trees. Some sal trees die when there is a profusion of this insect. For over a century, reports of this insect and its life cycle revealed that weather cycles are responsible for its profusion and the negative impact on the sal tree is contained by changes in the weather. But the Madhya Pradesh Forest Department, believing that it is the master of nature, declared an epidemic of sal borer in 1997. Meetings and conferences were held and the experts agreed that the only way to save the sal forests was to cut the infected trees so as to minimise the infection in the following years. Thus began a massive operation involving tens and thousands of labourers and thousands of trucks in the most pristine tiger forests around Kanha National Park. Before anyone could object 600,000 trees had been cut down. I was asked to assess the situation from the wildlife point of view, and when our sub-committee carried out its field visit, we were shocked to discover that scores of healthy sal trees had been cut down using the excuse of an insect. Depots of wood were brimming full and the largest economic exploitation of the sal forests was underway with an estimated 30 lakh trees ready for the axe. It would have been one of the biggest timber operations in independent India.

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

343

Fortunately, a quickly produced and a sharply critical report on this entire operation resulted in an intervening application in a Supreme Court case which ordered an end to the cutting of any live sal tree. We had lost 600,000 trees but hopefully saved some. It was amazing to see an entire system crawl into the life cycle of an insect, not to deal with the disease, but to work out the commercial exploitation of the forest. On the 50th anniversary of India's independence and on the 25th anniversary of Project Tiger, the tiger state was showing its true colours in what I consider as one of the most shocking episodes of tree felling.' Valmik Thapar, 'Fatal Links', Seminar, No. 466, June 1998.

I did much writing about the horrors that afflicted the system. The systems of governance seemed exhausted and without political will to direct them like the case of Jamua Ramgarh in Rajasthan: 'Let us now move into Rajasthan and the fate of the Jamua Ramgarh wildlife sanctuary. Way back in May 1982, it was notified that all forest land was reserved forest, yet both state and Central governments, in total violation of the law, continue to renew mining leases. The two more recent renewals are by the MoEF. In a letter dated 21 January 1998 the ministry wrote about the 'Diversion of 401.812 ha of forest land for mining in favour of 37 mine owners in Jaipur West District. After careful consideration of the proposal of the state government the Central government hereby gives approval for a diversion of 390.524 ha in favour of 34 mine owners for a period of two years only. The state government must ensure the closure of the mining operation in the area within two years and an interim report on the action taken to ensure this may be sent after one year.' Not stated in the letter is the fact that the leases are part of the sanctuary. It only mentions the area as 'Jaipur West District' and cleverly states that operations should cease by 21.1.2000, as if the sanctioning authority was aware of having broken the law.

344

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Large sections of Jamua Ramgarh are completely devastated by mining with at least 12 sq km wiped out and another 10 sq km seriously affected. At least Rs 500 crore of minerals are plundered and sold each year. Mining has pillaged the beauty of this area, including inside the water body, contravening all laws of the land. Leases for soapstone mining have blocked vital wildlife migratory routes. Nobody really cares. There is a grey area regarding the boundary, few know what is in or out, and most would prefer to believe that this is not a sanctuary. Jamua Ramgarh is reflective of the state of the unknown and unvisited sanctuaries of India. Violated, plundered, and bombedout by mines in contravention of the laws; worse, the Central and state governments are a party to these violations. It is a shocking story of wildlife governance where the well-known parks become showpieces while the rest are neglected and violated. Does the mining of our forests and protected areas pay for elections? Does it line the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats? Is it such a powerful lobby that no court or law dare stand in its way? Today, around 2000 mining leases and quarry licences are destroying more than 75,000 hectares of Rajasthan's tiny forest cover. Add to that 5,300 sawmills that account for 468,503 cu metres each year. Rajasthan has only around 3 per cent of forest cover left— dense forest accounts for 3,500 sq kms and open forest about 9,000 sq kms. That even this tiny area is plundered is indeed a tragedy. What does the Wildlife Protection Act say about sanctuaries like Jamua Ramgarh? According to Section 29: 'No person shall destroy, exploit or remove any wildlife from a sanctuary or destroy or damage the habitat of any wild animal or its habitat within a sanctuary. And what are we doing? The wild ass sanctuary in the Little Rann of Kutch is a fascinating wilderness area. It is unique and more than a mere world heritage site. Every monsoon the desert welcomes the sea and large portions become breeding grounds for crustaceans and millions of flamingos and other migratory birds who come to feast and breed. It is also the only home of the wild ass. In 1973, 4,953 sq km of this vast, flat salt-cracked area was declared a sanctuary, one of the largest in Asia.

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

345

It is estimated to have 2,000 wild asses endemic to this area and a host of other species of wildlife, at least 253 species of flowering plants, 167 species of algae, 93 species of invertebrates including 27 species of spiders, 4 species of amphibians, 29 species of reptiles, 22 species of fish, 81 species of terrestrial birds, 97 species of water birds, and 61 species of mammals. But tragically, given its unique nature, it is a vast repository of salt as well. A local NGO, the Dhrangadhra Prakriti Mandal, approached the court in 1996 to save the region from excessive exploitation. They stated: 'In the last few months some powerful vested interests in the salt industry as well as in the government are demanding and actively pressurising the government to denotify the sanctuary. Demand for new land for salt manufacturing increases day by day and because of the encroachments the wild ass enters the crop lands. The Little Rann of Kutch is unique and the most complete desert on earth and it is now feared that this last abode of the Indian wild ass will fall prey in the hands of short-sighted politicians and industrialists. The whole sanctuary with its delicate ecosystem stands degraded, more so as the days go by. With every norm violated, the sanctuary is falling apart and is likely to become crematorium for wildlife.' The petitioners further stated that between 1985 and 1990, the salt pan area in the sanctuary increased from 2,479 hectares to 39,955 hectares. The 1990 figure has now tripled! And they are not wrong. The sanctuary accounts for 20 per cent of the total salt production of India and 50,000 people illegally work inside the sanctuary. At least 2,500 trucks ply back and forth every day taking out salt. Every rule of the Wildlife Protection Act has been violated; more than 1,000 sq km of the sanctuary area is being mined for salt. Before the sanctuary was notified there were only 203 licenced mines over 166 sq km. After the entire area was notified as a sanctuary another 1448 mining licences were given over 294 sq km of the sanctuary, and today nearly 1,700 mines operate legally on 460 sq km inside the sanctuary. The new leases were given by the revenue department flouting the Wildlife Protection Act.

346

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Let us look at what else afflicts this unique ecosystem. When the sea comes into the sanctuary, an army of shrimp catchers illegally enter and exploit the area. Nearly 1,800 boats with 9,000 fishermen use the area between July and September and catch at least 5,000 tonnes of fish which retail at a minimum price of Rs 60—100 crore each year. It is not unusual to see refrigerated trucks parked at the edge of the sanctuary waiting to transport the catch. Eleven species of prawn and 22 species of fish are caught, 95 per cent of it prawns. A total population of 70,000 fisherfolk live around the sanctuary. Chemical factories are bunched in a 20 km radius of the sanctuary, pumping out an enormous amount of untreated hazardous effluents and toxic waste. A soda ash chemical factory in the area pipes its effluents into an open gutter on the edge of the Falku river, 2.8 km from the sanctuary's boundary. In 1987, villages from the area went to the high court which ordered the company to shift the pipeline since it had severely damaged vegetation and the underground water table causing serious health hazards. Finally, the pipeline was reportedly located 0.6 km from the boundary of the sanctuary and everyone rushed to give their 'no objection' to this. On a visit to the site of the discharge, I found that it was still clearly inside the sanctuary. A small 'lake of effluents' had been created destroying vegetation and making it uninhabitable to wildlife. It had become a dumping ground for toxic wastes. Repeated attempts have been made by district collectors and the revenue departments to lease out sanctuary land for salt mining, thereby violating the Forest Conservation Act and Wildlife Protection Act of India. Clearly, the revenue department plays games with land records in order to provide leases. If this is not bad enough, the Indian Army has leased out an area of nearly 250 sq km of this sanctuary for field-firing exercises under the Army's Field Firing and Artillery Practice Act, 1939. The area for the army was notified by the Gujarat government in December 1969 for a period of 30 years. Once the sanctuary came into being, the land was notified in 1979. In 1985 the chief wildlife warden of Gujarat noted in a letter to the secretary of forests:

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

347

'As this area is situated in the little Rann of Kuch and is within the wild ass sanctuary area, the disturbances and the detrimental effects to the rare species are being noticed. It is seen that at times the firing kills the asses or maims them. In many instances the wild asses die due to noise and fear and run away ...'. He tried hard to persuade the Defence Ministry to move the firing range outside the sanctuary but in vain. The firing goes on.' Valmik Thapar, 'Violating India's Natural Treasures', Seminar,, No. 485, Jan. 2000.

The 1990s were full of events, encounters, and controversies. My attempt is to illustrate some of them to give a feel of those times. I think one of the first things that comes to my mind was in 1993 when a fully blown tiger crisis enveloped us. It was late in the year and I had taken members of the Cat Specialist Group of the IUCN to meet the minister. There were eight of us and the minister. He looked around and said, 'Valmik, I need to talk to you after the meeting'. He said then in all innocence, 'It's OK, I will tell you all about it.' He then recounted how he had been given a gift in his constituency (that was also a tiger reserve) and on coming to Delhi he unwrapped it to find a fresh tiger skin. My mouth fell open. I could not believe that the Minister of Environment and Forests had unknowingly accepted a gift of a tiger skin! My members were silenced. He asked us in all innocence, 'Advice.' Few knew what to say. In the end I think someone whom he was close to just picked up the skin from him and it may have been used to catch a poacher some years later! What a system existed! I think as non-officials some of us got really used by the system. We were good for the overall credibility of the politician. The politician always looks for the support of the NGOs. But we all were probably pawns in a much larger game and this for most of the time kept us ignorant of the reality we were up against. A friend in Bombay told me once that politicians love us because we say no so often to projects on environmental grounds that it often pushes the price u p for the ultimate deal.

348

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Who knows? Maybe. Following the tail of the tiger I learnt more about scams, the dirt, and the politics that plague India. I learnt all the 'things' I never knew about. It was like living a nightmare. The peace had been shattered. Ministers came and went. The horrors continued. The tiger walked on the richest part of India, Forest India. Everyone wanted a bit of it. Mines, minerals, minor forest produce, timber, large river valley projects—it was all about taking and not giving—and land was in short supply and the land mafia had become experts at using forest communities to encroach on forest land that years later would be legalized in the so-called interest of the 'poor'. Missions for the Ministry of Environment and Forests were always full of surprises. I remember once going to Tadoba Tiger Reserve and driving around with the field director and discussing the menace of poaching when suddenly from the bush came running six dogs and two men and they pounced on what we discovered was a wild boar. It was the first time on inspection I had witnessed a hunt in progress. On another occasion I was on an inspection of Ranthambhore with the Inspector General of Forests from the Ministry of Environment and Forests. We both had woken up early and therefore decided to drive around the park before all the paraphernalia woke up. Within twenty minutes we were confronted with hundreds of cows and buffalos and a threatening bunch of graziers that abused and tried to intimidate. The IG was shocked—it was a moment of great mismanagement in Ranthambhore's history. On another occasion, on an inspection of Nagarahole, somebody whispered in my ear that there was a big illegal timber camp operating from the heart of the National Park. We went to the site and saw the horrific remnants of the slaughter of trees that man does so well. A sawmill-like situation had been created in the forest and the local forest officers had preferred not to inform us. On another occasion while on an inspection of both an irrigation project and some mines around Madhav National Park in Shivpuri I realized looking at the map that something was wrong. I asked a young forest officer near me about the location of the dam. He whispered, 'Yes, it is in the national park.' Enquiries

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

349

were ordered on my return but there were violations of the laws everywhere. Everyone at the end of the 1990s was trying to get away with the murder of nature. None of the big projects followed their mandatory conditions. They violated the Environment Protection Act of 1986 a n d endlessly violated the Forest Conservation Act of 1980. There was little will to enforce. Chief ministers were not in fear of the prime minister like in Indira Gandhi's time. The states were busy dismantling the systems that existed—they were tinkering with the law. In fact, in a letter dated June 2001, Sonia Gandhi had to ask her party's chief ministers not to 'tinker' with the laws that Indira Gandhi had made. Such was the state of affairs. The makers of the law had become the breakers of the law. In the 1990s dozens of protected areas had been denotified without following any course of law. My missions to the field were enormously revealing. There were endless encounters all adding to an understanding of the problem, and building deep within me the experience of 'non-governance'. And then of course there were superb encounters with wildlife. There were endless days and nights spent with a diverse array of forest officers and staff that, for me, were a great experience in learning the ways and language of Forest India. You build through such a process a wisdom to act— never in haste but always strategically. I also had to realize at the end of the century that in 1992 I knew nothing about the functioning of the system and today some of my colleagues call me an expert on it. If there is some expertise, in many ways I regret it because it opened my mind to the horrors of governance and kept me tense with endless sleepless nights and nightmares. The peace had gone. Indira Gandhi's absence was felt desperately. Out of the 1800 odd ministers at the Centre and in the states there were few that cared or inspired decision making. Probably the only former minister who engaged and carried some political will on this issue was Maneka Gandhi—Sanjay Gandhi's wife and Indira Gandhi's daughter-in-law. She was, in the 1990s, the only one who cared enough to 'get things done'. How I wished her major passion was wild tigers and not domestic animals. Sadly, Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee never gave her the ministry of her choice and she was forced to move to several different portfolios

350

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

but not the Ministry of Environment and Forests which was her great desire. He was probably worried that the corporate world would frown at such a move. The big business interests of India had in the 1990s been at their exploitative best taking what they could from the forest without putting anything back. They had been fuelled by the new economic policies of the decade and their love affair with the politicians of these times had scarred the natural world. They had taken every short cut they could find and fully exploited the loopholes in the laws. In fact, the biggest players had sunk vast oil pipelines into one of the very few marine national parks against the objectives of all the laws that govern our national parks—but with total support of some of our critical functionaries of the law. The chief wildlife warden in this case had stated that the land along the alignment of the pipelines was degraded and in fact such pipelines would benefit the marine area and therefore a 'no objection' was provided. Such was the hopeless state of affairs that we tried to work in. At the turn of the century the wheelchair politicians of India and their business escorts had snared Forest India in the most vicious of jaw traps just like the tiger was in Nagarahole. Their greed and inaction on this front was totally demoralizing. Where would we go from here? If you were too critical of what was happening you ended up being warned off. The system wanted their back scratchers. I had over the years fought endless battles and some individuals in the government were weary of what they thought was my 'power'. They tried desperately to harass me by pushing at questions about the organization I founded so that it could be enquired into and through that process effectively paralysed. They also tried to harass me by trying to say I was a 'poacher' and therefore needed to be investigated by one of their agencies. I could not believe it— a poacher! How the system could be twisted around. On another occasion the chief wildlife warden of Rajasthan rang me up at 11 p.m. to say that the police chief of Sawai Madhopur had rung him to say that I would be served an arrest warrant for kidnapping, etc. I was asked to keep away from my house for a few days so that they could not find me. I could not believe it and was really frightened. I consulted my lawyers in the middle of the night. We were to realize later that a local judicial official had intentionally

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

351

or otherwise made a 'clerical error'. Luckily none of their efforts succeeded. If you make enemies while fighting for what is just and right you also make friends and the experience of the 1990s was a great lesson about how to function, how to find a path in the complex maze of 'conservation'. But I knew that when you battle, you must watch your back and protect it; otherwise you get knifed. There was much wheeling and dealing in the corridors of power—the politics of conservation. I have kept a record of it but most of it for the moment must remain unwritten, and off the record. Suffice it to say that ideas, committees, strategies, cells, interventions, etc., travelled t h r o u g h a series of ministers representing different political parties in our efforts to find correctives to the problems of both forest and wildlife. Everything in our command was used—every contact triggered. We were a group of four or five and without people like Indira Gandhi in command we were deeply involved in our efforts to strengthen conservation and lobby. There was no other choice. But it changed us and definitely me. From the pure joy and innocence of following tigers you turn manipulative and political, matching your wits against a system that is all-powerful and that can choose to do n o t h i n g but play games with you. We knew that for the government the best way to neutralize criticism was to create committees and our small group either participated or helped in the creation of more than thirty such committees, cells, forums, and such like in those years between 1992-2000. What a waste of time it was! But it took us some years to learn this. Life and work are about triumphs and failures. But in my case there were more failures. If I was able to collect 320 signatures of members of Parliament to save wild tigers and hand them to then Prime Minister, I.K. Gujral. It was a disaster to see how that Parliament dissolved within months of handing over those signatures. I had known I.K. Gujral since I was a boy and he was a great friend of my father. From 1989 the Indian Board for Wildlife had met only once—in 1997—chaired by Deve Gowda who sadly dozed through parts of the meeting. I participated in this meeting, my first as a member of the Board. I thought, in 1998, that we could create new policy in the sector of forest and

352

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

wildlife and managed to persuade I.K. Gujral, the then prime minister, to convene a meeting. I briefed him a bit and he asked me to spend thirty minutes with him before the meeting commenced for a more detailed briefing. I sat in the prime minister's office for what seemed like hours. He was seventy-five minutes late for the meeting and I then went to wait for him at the gate below to try and 'brief' him from the time he left the car and walked up to the meeting room. Really, a brief two minutes is all I had before we entered the meeting room. And then to my total shock I.K. Gujral also dozed through parts of the meeting! Oh, I wondered—where was Indira Gandhi?—I.K. Gujral had been one of her trusted Cabinet ministers but he had no deep-rooted passion for the wilderness. Tragic! I had watched two consecutive prime ministers of India take their forty winks during meetings of what was the most important policy-making body for forests and wildlife. They were both tired men who took time off during what I considered were critical meetings. I had missed my moment and I.K. Gujral, with all his good intentions, barely had one year in p o w e r before the politics of the time forced a change in government. I tried everything in the late 1990s and another of my father's old friends, Jaswant Singh, presently the Finance Minister of India, h a d to receive endless letters f r o m me about reform and governance and what was needed. I always got some response but it was never what was needed. To a large extent my efforts were failing. I was more and more disillusioned with the state of affairs. Prime ministers came and went; so did endless other ministers—everyone endlessly shifting around. For most, the issue of forest and wildlife was to be snored at and ignored. Governance had reached its lowest ebb. This was probably why the courts were more active. I spent much time between 1995 and 1998 attempting to activate NGO movements both in India and abroad in the interest of both forest and tigers. In that period there was unlimited zeal for the objective and I must have networked more than sixty jeeps, trucks, and motorcycles for different areas in order to strengthen protection. There were lots of excitement, lots of meeting, and a belief that anyone can trigger effective action. Those were hectic

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

353

years but I was to realize later that such efforts only minimize damage, if you are lucky. Otherwise most of the time they do not result in effective action. One of the great realizations of the 1990s was that for any kind of conservation good information is essential and through a fifty-page newsletter detailed information on the state of the tiger was transmitted to over 1,000 people every four months. I think this was useful. In a way it must have minimized damage. That is why it continues to come out. Good information is a bullet for effective conservation both for officials in government and out of government. But never more did I realize that those that really make a difference are forest officials committed to the job. These handful of government officials have the field power to act and, if supported, can deliver magical results. The conservation strategies of jeeps, trucks, etc., do not work so well. Innovative ideas deliver better results. Working closely with good committed officials can do wonders for both forest and wildlife. NGOs on their own in India cannot make a difference. They can keep flying the flag about a crisis and collect funds but without a committed forest officer they achieve little. For most of the time the mushrooming of NGOs took place but little was achieved; money was wasted. Few created strategies that were practical and effective. That was the tragedy of the NGOs as we entered the twenty-first century. How do you develop a small band of forest officers as the committed bunch for protection? How do you prevent their unnecessary transfers? How do you create political will for them and the area they govern? How do you build the infrastructures they want? These were vital questions that faced all of us and if you could find some answers to them we would be a few steps closer towards effective action. We limped into the end of the decade. I wrote something about the end of a century and the beginning of another. It provides a glimpse of those very difficult and torturous times. I reproduce an edited version of my article 'The Big Cat Massacre' first published in Saving Wild Tigers: 1900-2000—Essential Writings. 'I thought I would end this century feasting on the extraordinary recovery of the wild tigers of Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve in the

354

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

state of Rajasthan and in a way I did. I spent nearly thirty minutes reversing my jeep some 4 km in the face of a tigress that at 3 p.m. decided to move from one end of the valley to another and it was a day to remember as I quietly clicked my camera and loved every minute of it. It was also a moment when it was confirmed that after forty years a male wild dog had been sighted in Ranthambhore. What a recovery! But I was rudely awakened on 19 December 2000 to the grim horrors of what is happening to the wilderness when purely by accident the sales tax inspectors in Ghaziabad, a small town in north India intercepted a truck and found, instead of illegal garments, fifty leopard skins, three tiger skins, and a handful of other skins. The story came in the newspapers as most things do these days and for some of us in and out of government we remained in shock for a couple of days. After all it was probably the second largest seizure of big cat skins since independence and brought home the fact that our precious wilderness was vanishing. Something must have needled me and finally gathering the courage to face the slaughter I went with some of the senior officers of the Ministry of Environment and Forests to the city of Ghaziabad. It was 7 a.m. and the smog and mist of the filth of both Delhi and all its satellite towns were only just lifting. We drove for over an hour and then into the sprawling mess of Ghaziabad's by-lanes until we arrived at the DFO's residence. I was with the Inspector General of Forests and as we stepped out of the car and walked a few yards around a corner, there in front of us were laid out the skins of so many dead leopards that the first sight of it took the breath away and stunned all of us into silence. In a numb state we moved looking slowly at what must be only the tip of an iceberg in the ongoing massacre of India's wildlife—how may thousands of mornings I have waited even for the faintest sign of a leopard in India's forest! I have craved to see even a glimpse of them. I have probably seen about twenty-eight 28 leopards over the last twenty-five years and here I was surrounded by fifty dead ones. Some were enormous in size, the skins shining in the early morning sun. There were hardly any marks in them. Probably they

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

355

were all poisoned or electrocuted. A couple appeared to have been caught in foot traps and then smashed on the head to kill them as the congealed blood suggested. They all looked freshly killed—in the last six months. They had been cured somewhere and waxed and even had the signature of the 'artist' at the back. They were perfectly folded like table cloths—it was a blood-curdling sight. I could imagine the horrors that these animals must have been through—their agony, their death howls. Standing silently in the midst of the skins, my head, my heart, my every pore seemed fading into oblivion. I realized that the recovery of Ranthambhore was probably only an illusion. I touched, looked, and turned over some of the skins. My colleagues from the ministry were shocked. In a way, we were as close to tears as anyone could be. I moved to an enormous tiger skin. Its foot looked punctured in a foot trap, its flank had spear or knife marks, suggesting the tiger had roared in fury and pain and the poaching gang had come by and speared it down. My vision of the end of the century had been ripped apart, torn in pieces; it was covered in blood. There was no doubt that hundreds of leopards and tigers were being decimated by the coordinated working of poaching gangs right across India. Were skins being ordered like garments? Why were there exactly fifty leopard skins booked from Delhi to Siliguri, a small town close to the border of Nepal? Are there other such consignments of fifty? How many gangs are out there engaged in this horrific slaughter? One century has just ended, another has started, but as a conservation community we have totally failed. The government, the ministry, the states, the NGOs, and people like myself—we have entered the twenty-first century with no intelligence, no information. We are totally impotent because there is hardly any effective mechanism of wildlife governance and enforcement. All our laws are violated with impunity. We are mute spectators to a massive slaughter in every forest of India. If big business has ripped apart India's wilderness for mining, illegal traders have picked out our precious wildlife for commerce and none of us has worked out a way to counter either. Our natural treasury is being devastated. The

356

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

twentieth century could not have ended on an uglier or more hideous note. Now, in this disastrous dawn of a new century, the wildlife of India is dying. It is a national shame, an unmitigated disaster that our country has not been able to take on the challenge to save its superb natural heritage. There is no room for lip service any more, no room for complacency. There is only one goal ahead. Those who care must engage in the battle to save some of India's natural treasures and secure their future. So far we have failed. In the core of my head I carry into the new millennium only a vision of skin and bone, of congealed blood, of a mass of skins, of the horrors of what man does. This is my 'new millennium', my utter, utter shame, at our total impotence to save the wilderness of a great nation, my devastation at the global indifference to protecting our wilderness across the planet. I did not realize that the beginning of the twenty-first century would get even worse. On 12 January 2000, a day I will never forget, acting on a tip that must have resulted from the 19 December seizure, a police party with wildlife inspectors raided three premises in Khaga, Fatehpur, in the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, and seized seventy leopard skins, four tiger skins, 221 blackbuck skins, 18,000 leopard claws, 132 tiger claws. It appears that both seizures are linked. The three premises were illegal factories that were tanning and curing skins. By 15 January, from around these premises more than 185 kg of tiger and leopard bones were recovered, revealing the horrifying state of affairs. Wildlife governance was in a complete state of collapse and clearly 'operation wipe-out' was on. As if it was not enough, by May two more seizures in Haldwani resulted in a recovery of eighty more leopard skins and endless other skins. The twenty-first century had dawned with a nightmare. The biggest haul of large cat skins had taken place over a few weeks at the end of one century and the beginning of another. Never before had there been a haul of this magnitude and scale in the history of India. Skins, bones, and derivatives of 1,400 leopards and fifty tigers—all in one place! Imagine what has been processed in these factories over the last decade.

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

357

We are already loosing at least 10,000 sq km of dense forest each year to timber mafias and so-called developers. We believe that at least twelve billion dollars worth of forest is exploited from India's natural treasury each year, and I am convinced that hundreds of tigers and leopards are trapped, poisoned, and poached so that their skin, claws, and other derivatives feed the international market. The skin market across the world is booming with demand and the planet is loosing the best of its natural treasure. This is not just India's failure. We have failed globally. Much of the responsibility must fall on our international organizations, both inter-governmental and non-governmental. The last two seizures are the tip of an iceberg. India's wilderness heads for disaster. To prevent it requires global will and urgent reform in the enforcement mechanisms that prevent illegal trade across the world. Can we hope for a global political will that brings effective international cooperation and not lip service? Can we hope that innovative mechanisms for enforcement do not get lost in endless rhetoric and diplomacy? Can we even begin to hope that human beings everywhere will act before it is too late to reverse the horrors that envelope us all, across the planet? Can we greet the new century with effective global field action? I have followed the trail of the tiger for twenty-five years and it has led me over the richest part of India—Forest India. In this forest land there is a vast amount of timber, marble, gems, manganese, iron ore, bauxite, and so many minerals that everyone's mouth waters. Minor forest produce abounds and everyone wants a bit of the land. Big dams, infrastructural projects, and land mafias want their piece too. It is India's natural treasury and this natural wealth is under so much pressure that its very survival is threatened. This is 20 per cent of India, and the most neglected sector of governance, probably by the explicit preference of our ignorant or mischievous political leadership. In this country we do not create mechanisms for protection but we excel at creating mechanisms for exploitation. We must work out ways to stop it and put public pressure on our political leadership to restructure existing mechanisms and focus on real issues. For instance, take the federal

358

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

arm involved with saving tigers in the ministry of environment and forests: 95 per cent of its time, effort, and money are spent on clearing public and private sector projects and dealing with city pollution. The 20 per cent of India which is Forest India has been allocated a tiny insignificant 'wing' to deal with its issues. Can you imagine the richest part of India having only a 'wildlife wing'? The richest part of India never has a decent allocation of money from the Planning Commission. The richest part of India has no ministry to protect it. No one cares. Everyone lives by rhetoric. The problems of the forest get only lip service and countless recommendations gather dust in different offices. What a tragedy of governance! What a mockery of administration! How do you save tigers in the twenty-first century? We must start from scratch and restructure all our mechanisms for wildlife and forest administration. To start with we need: (a) A new federal ministry for the protection of forests and wildlife; (b) A review of the Indian Forest Service for encouraging specialization in the protection of biological resources; (c) A national armed force for the forest officer, on call like a Forest Police Force, to minimize the enormous damage to our natural treasury; (d) Rapid financial mechanisms to disburse money from the federal structure to the field for better management; (e) A declaration of this sector as essential so that the huge vacancies that plague forest staff are filled and the gates to looting are closed; and (f) Disbanding Project Tiger. The time has come in the twentyfirst century to disband Project Tiger that over the decades has become only a disburser of money and has no power to govern. Instead, under this new ministry a 'Tiger Protection Authority of India must be created that is empowered under the law to appoint, recruit, transfer, and assess all officers in tiger reserves from the rank of ranger upwards. This 'Authority' must also be able to disburse money directly to the field and have the

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

359

final say in the management of all our twenty-seven Project Tiger Reserves. Only when these mechanisms are actually and effectively put in place can we even begin to start tackling the details of the most vital and most seriously neglected area of our planet-—the forests. Landuse policy, community conservation schemes, joint forest management, and so much more require innovative brainstorming. The first priority is to set into motion the six measures outlined above. The rest will follow. Only then will we be on the path of saving wild(tigers in the new millennium.' Valmik Thapar, 'The Big Cat Massacre', in Saving Wild Tigers: 1900-2000— Essential Writings, Valmik Thapar (ed.), 2001.

The century turned but little changed—a stream of endless meetings and little field impact. It was clear that little of what we had fought for was ever going to see the light of day. Few wanted to change and reform the system of governance. In January 2002 Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, chaired a rare meeting of the Indian Board for Wildlife. It was a good meeting. I had worked closely with the ministry for it. We had an excellent secretary in the ministry at this point and it was a pleasure working with him. Our minister was also a no-nonsense person and efficient at his job. Probably what turned the tables for this meeting was a bunch of children who a couple of days before had gone to meet the prime minister and ask him to save the tiger. I was also present and I watched him squirm away from answering the children's questions. He did not know the answers. This was not the deeprooted wilderness-loving Indira Gandhi. It must have been an embarrassing experience and probably led to the positive energy in the subsequent meeting. Vajpayee promised forests to be declared a priority sector and a forest commission to look at reform of the forest sector and a series of other exciting interventions. I was able to articulate at this meeting the urgent need for a separate ministry. Again, we concluded the meeting in a moment of excitement but till this book went to press only a forest commission had been set up under the chairmanship of a dynamic former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Our biggest problem of the

360

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

last decade had been follow-up. There were lots of rhetoric, paperwork, promises, recommendations, and endless shouts and barks but the action at the field level was missing. Follow-ups were dismal. There was no Indira Gandhi wielding the whip from above. Persistent political will was absent and the resultant frustration with the state of affairs enormous. One of the biggest sagas of these crisis years was the functioning of one of the largest NGOs. In a way, as the crisis became severe they functioned least effectively. The NGO was basically run by one of the larger corporate families in India and I remember the day in 2001 when I was asked to join the board of trustees. This process was accompanied by top-level changes in this organization since all its chapters across the world were complaining about its inefficiency. I believed somewhere that things would change for the better but I was surprised at the discussions that were held with me over lunch by the chairman and some of the trustees. This was before I got my formal invitation to join. It was li ke a businessman's club clueless about conservation but trying very hard to preach to me. My lesson was that I should now control my critique on government since I would be a 'prestigious' trustee of a large organization. I realized that the chairman had no spunk and lived in fear of the system that governed. But the letter sent to me was even funnier. He stated: 'The Trustees would expect you to work together and speak in one voice on all joint and common endeavours.... cannot be made into a forum for individuals to express their own personal views which may be in divergence with the views of... . Any public statement made by a Trustee must essentially express the view of... and the majority of Trustees. I do hope that you will accept our invitation bearing in mind that our strength arises from our common endeavour and unanimity on issues of national and international importance.' I replied: 'I hope that my public statement not only touch the heart and soul of conservation and naturally therefore the views of ... but also inspire the team at... our common endeavour to protect and save the natural world.'

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

361

Finally, I joined but lasted only a few weeks since the then CEO, a lady whom I had given my support to for the last few months, was just so rude in her behaviour that after a phone conversation I decided that this was not for me. I would end up 'eating her alive'. A year later, in 2002, in response to a letter to me from her asking about what the organization should do, I replied: '... all those without experience in conservation on the Board of Trustees and herself included should step down ...'. The poor giant—it failed to p e r f o r m in the interest of India's wilderness. It suffered from a complete lack of guts, knowledge, and action and though it tried to fly the flag in the crisis it just did not know what to do. It was a giant in hibernation waiting to be woken up and while it slept the world around it vanished. And how the staff fought with each other—it was a nightmare! What politics, what intrigue! It was 2002. There was no forest and wildlife brain in the political leadership. There was no Indira Gandhi. There was a snowballing crisis. What provided some relief was the will of the judiciary and especially the Supreme Court of India. In the absence of good governance and political will in the forest sector they had stepped in with a series of radical decisions to save India's forests. In fact, Case No. 202 as it is known would go down in the history of the country as a case that gave the forests of India at their most critical juncture some 'breathing space'. God knows what would have happened without Case No. 202 and all the decisions that emanated from it. While the courts, at least the Supreme Court of India, moved in the interest of forests and wildlife, many forest ministers of state governments showed their total insensitivity to the problems at hand. Rajasthan and Karnataka during 2001-2 had forest ministers who lacked deep-rooted commitment to the natural heritage of the country. The one in Rajasthan had made life miserable for a bunch of good and honest forest officers. The Director of Ranthambhore had to face endless false enquiries against him. For me most of 2001-2 went in meetings with either leaders of political parties or chief ministers in order to ensure that the damage to good individuals within the forest service and some of the institutions were kept minimal. Because of absent political will, conservation meant lobbying and forcing political

362

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

will. This had become a totally time-consumirig process. You woke and slept thinking about it! Work was a series of phone calls and meeting endless political leaders and bureaucrats. My friend Ullas Karanth in Karnataka, known for his amazing scientific work with tigers, had all his permissions for research withdrawn. The whims of ministers and the disasters they trigger! As I write this there is a big male tiger in Nagarahole walking around with a foot trap on its front paw—a few days to live—and like him there must be many more all over India. And who is to blame? I am clear about this fact. Ignorant politicians, forest ministers who can not see beyond their nose, and key bureaucrats who could not care less, were to blame; and none of these key decision m a k e r s h a d an Indira G a n d h i w a t c h i n g t h e m . Controversies, violations of the law, scams, maladministration, and the horrors of consultancies had neutralized field action, integrity, and commitment. Our academic institutes that teach wildlife had been plagued by a wave of money-making. The institutions that govern forest and wildlife were being eroded, and eaten into. In a way both at the Centre and the states there was apathy. You were lucky only if you find the right man in the right job who believed in battling the system. These men (forest officers) were few and far between but it was people like them that gave hope. Forest tracts that have done well in the last decade have done so because such men survive and the best conservation work has to be to 'lobby' for their survival and ensure their correct postings. This is vital. Some of the best conservation work, as far as I am concerned was done by individuals who quietly and invisibly ensured that good people either stayed in their posts or got posted to the right place. Meetings, telephone calls, and intensive lobbying without any 'grand' project or donor-led initiative did the trick. And this quiet work is still vital—the right man in the right place at the right time. The NGO movement has failed in the last years to deal with the issues. Most of them have got richer as the crisis ballooned. Few had the wisdom to do the right thing at the right time. It is strange how the apathy of government and the apathy of the NGOs go hand in hand. Organizations can mushroom, but if they do not have any understanding of the crisis, their role is counterproductive and

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

363

can have negative impacts on the problems. I think this has happened in India. In all this mess the Supreme Court came out with a ray of light. In June 2002 it came to the aid of Forest India by creating a Central E m p o w e r e d Committee—I h a d always d r e a m t of something like this where a small group of people or even an individual could be empowered by the Supreme Court of India to resolve some of the all-enveloping problems. On 3 June 2002 it came true with the constitution of an empowered committee and I was also on it. Maybe a small window of light had been created on the horizon. I grabbed at it. Looking back, it was clear that from 1996 when we were at the lowest ebb the Supreme Court had played a vital role to protect the nation's natural treasures. Two writ petitions had triggered the Supreme Court Case No. 202 of 1995 and Case No. 171 of 1996. The first dealt with deforestation in the Nilgiri's and the second with deforestation in Jammu and Kashmir. During these two hearings the Supreme Court realized that deforestation was a critical national problem and notices were issued to all the states in India. In the last six years at least 150 interim orders have been passed beginning with the well-known order of 1996 wherein forests were redefined to prevent any loopholes in the law that permitted for felling trees or indulging in other exploitative activities. Felling was stopped throughout India except in accordance to a working plan approved by the central government and in this case it was the Ministry of Environment and Forests. In many ways, in the absence of an Indira Gandhi, the Court was empowering the ministry to act. All non-forest activities on forest land such as mining, sawmills, and wood-based industries were stopped pending approval of the C e n t r a l g o v e r n m e n t a n d clearance u n d e r the Forest Conservation Act. Felling of trees was totally banned in the tropical evergreen forest in the Tirap and Changlang areas of Arunachal Pradesh. All sawmills 100 km on either side of the border between Assam and Arunachal Pradesh were ordered shut down. The movement of timber from the north-eastern states was also stopped. In subsequent orders the removal of trees, grasses, etc., were stopped from national parks and sanctuaries. The definition of forest land covered all wildlife habitats of the country, be they

364

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

private, protected, or not. The Supreme Court had done a remarkable job. God knows what the state of chaos forest and wildlife would have been in without these earth-shaking orders. I have to say that from 1996-2002 I was ignorant of the kind of credible orders that were emanating from the Supreme Court. It was these orders that saved the wilderness of India in the last decade when political will was so invisible. Though the ministry had a larger role because of the court orders, few of us were certain that it could play its part in the new role of the enforcer of all this. Did the right people exist in it who had the courage to act? To save Forest India and all the wildlife that exists in it the Court had, in 2002, created the Central Empowered Committee to ensure that there was compliance by all the parties to its orders and it empowered the Committee to act much like a court. By 9 September 2002 the Supreme Court in a judgment made this Committee statutory. I quote the judgment issued from the court of the Chief Justice of India: A draft of the proposed notification under Section 3(3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 of constituting the Central Empowered Committee has been shown to the Court. According to the draft, the Committee is being constituted for a period of five years. The constitution of the Committee would be: (i) Shri P.V. Jayakrishnan, Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests as Chairman; (ii) Shri N.K. Joshi, Additional Director General of Forests, Ministry of Environment and Forests as Member; (iii) Shri Valmik Thapar, Ranthambhore Foundation as Member; (iv) Shri Mahendra Vyas, Advocate, Supreme Court of India as Member and (v) Shri M.K. Jiwrajka, Inspector General of Forests, Ministry of Environment and Forests as Member Secretary. They all are appointed in their personal capacity. A formal notification will be issued within a week. As and when this notification is issued, whatever functions and responsibilities had been given to the Empowered Committee will now be exercised by this Statutory Committee.'

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

365

At this time as the Committee gave me hope when I despaired about the state of both forest and tiger in India, I wrote a piece about this in September 2002.1 reproduce the same here: The State of the Indian Tiger 2002 (The Status) It is the eve of the thirtieth anniversary of Project Tiger. When Project Tiger started in 1973 the population of India was about 780 million; today it is nearly 1.1 billion. From nine tiger reserves in 1973 it has come to twenty-nine in 2002. When Project Tiger began there were an estimated 1,800 wild tigers. I believe today nearly thirty years later there are about the same number alive—maybe a few hundred more. So is it success or failure? This is the really difficult question that faces us. In 1992 when poaching scandals swept across India I did not believe the tiger would survive the turn of the century. It did. So at some level the tigers' present state is a sign of success. Let us quickly glance across to where these 1,800—2,000 tigers live: 1. I think, one of the best populations of wild tigers live off the western coast of India where the forests of Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu meet in the protected areas of Nagarahole, Bandipur, Madhumalai, and endless tracts of connecting reserve forests. Somewhere between 4,000 to 5,000 sq km of superb forest could house more than 300 tigers. This is the best tiger turf in India today. 2. Another large chunk of more than 3,000 sq km of forest, bordering the states of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra in central India right from the Satpura and Betul forest to Melghat, could house more than 150 tigers. This is a lovely forest but densities of both tiger and prey are on the low side. 3. The Sundarbans right across eastern India and Bangladesh on the edge of the sea and covering nearly 5,000 sq km of fantastic mangrove forests could have more than 300 tigers. These are the only three largest chunks left in India with living tigers. Single large protected areas like Kanha, Corbett, Kaziranga, and a few others and their surrounding forests could have 100 each.

366

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

And then there are some tiny gems, little islands of tigers like Ranthambhore, Panna, Bandhavgarh, and Tadoba that keep smaller tiger populations alive. At some level the overall situation is bleak. The larger populations of tigers over contiguous forests are declining. Keeping them alive is one of the biggest challenges for the government since they have to deal with complex issues across states and countries. The forests are fragmented to a much greater extent than ever before and connectivity from one to another has nearly vanished. The levels of illegal encroachments have been enormous eroding the corridors. In the last five years local extinctions of tigers have started to take place and in my opinion the population declines by 150-200 each year. Some of India's premier national parks have isolated populations that if well protected, will continue to survive. Besides the few large chunks left, the future is in keeping alive small populations in very well-protected belts of forests that will probably have no connectivity with other areas; genetic health will always be a question mark in the future. Tigers in these small pockets will always be under pressure. Today to develop any pragmatic strategy we must look at this very complex scenario ahead of us and not wrap ourselves in any false illusion of saving vast tracts of forest and tigers. Effective Strategies—a Blueprint for Action I have spent twenty-seven years of my life working with and for wild tigers. Over the last two years I have tried to assess what really works and what does not work in saving tigers. It is clear to me that whether it is non-governmental organizations or indeed the government itself spending large sums of money is not the answer. In fact money does not in itself solve the problem or save wild tigers. So what does? 1. In India one of the most vital strategies for individuals, NGOs or others to follow is to get the right man posted to the right job, be it the director of the protected area or even the ranger. The team that governs an area must be handpicked. This is the toughest job because it does not come with a 'fancy' project proposal. It comes with advocacy, persuasion, and good

T H E E N D OF A CENTURY

367

contacts and when all these factors effectively place people in the right position there is rapid success. No amount of jeeps, trucks, rural work, or other funding can help if the right team is not in place. So this process involves lobbying and creating political and administrative will to select the right team. And, then the right teams need to be inspired by recognition and awards. 2. When and only when such a team is in place, should international NGOs come to assist, be it for any bit of infrastructure that is necessary. The Indian counterparts should only focus on ensuring that the team remains in place without its personnel being transferred. Ensure a long tenure of service—it saves tigers. This can be done by advocacy and lobbying. Support the good forest officer and his team. 3. Equally important is to fund and support good scientific and field research in protected areas where the team in place is good. Field research not only provides clues to better management but also monitors the health of the park. This is a vital strategy to save tigers and forests in the future. This is what international organizations should focus on, in terms of maximum funding. 4. Legal efforts, public interest litigations, interlocutory applications have all played a vital part to save the tigers' habitat in the last decade. The Supreme Court of India and some of the High Courts have played critical roles to keep tigers and forests alive. There are nearly 200 positive court judgments in this connection just in the last decade. What on earth would the tiger have done without our judiciary! 5. Records, films, books, the media, good information, and its dissemination are all vital in the above strategies. Legal judgments need to be distributed across Forest India so that the orders are not only given the widest publicity but also implemented. Each area needs a documentation centre. Information is the bullet for conservation. It is through an information cell that you can increase awareness and engage more and more people in the battle ahead. Good authentic

368

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

information and documentation are vital for the law courts. Information and documentation centres are essential for saving wild tiger. This area has been much ignored by international organizations. Sadly they do not realize its significance. 6. Encourage individuals (not NGOs) to deal with all these issues as stated above. Individuals shouldfirstlyhave a special interest in wildlife watching and commitment to the cause of the wilderness. It is these people that could make a difference and determine if tigers live or die. They need small sums of money to keep them going. It is time to provide 3-5 year grants or stipends to individuals more like a tiger fellowship or monthly wage that allows the person to focus fully on the issues at hand. They could also run and update the information centres. This will be vital to strengthen networking across the region.

Conclusion For the moment nothing else should be considered by all those in and outside India who wish to save tigers. Wind up the other projects. The reason why many large international NGOs have had little impact in the last decade is that they chose the wrong things to do and both their Indian counterparts and themselves gave little time to assessing the impact of their work or evaluating their interventions—few of them turned tiger literate, be it in India or outside. The larger movement to save tigers suffered. It has become too diverse and unfocussed and ridden with political intrigue. Most of India's success stories with tigers in the last decade came because good forest officers and their teams performed. And our courts pronounced the right judgments. Most others, especially the large organizations, came in to ride the bandwagon and fly the 'donors' flag of success even when they have no role in a success story. Only a few small organizations played effective and useful roles. For me it has been tragic to watch this process. The f u t u r e is going to be really tough. International organizations—donors and their Indian counterparts—must

THE E N D OF A CENTURY

369

change course and strategy picking carefully on what to do and funding small strategic amounts in the right target area. Ask if you do not know. There are always people who will advise you without charging a consultancy fee for it. Do not walk in blindly— it does more harm than good. So many well-intentioned strategies have turned counterproductive. So much money has gone waste. On the eve of the thirtieth anniversary let us change course effectively. If we do not find a way to change course and with a collective conscience, the tiger's process to virtual extinction will be accelerated. So let us be realistic, let us save what we can, let us keep tiny fortresses of the tiger like Ranthambhore secure. Let us work with small isolated populations—there is not very much else to work with. Our government strategies will focus fully on the large chunks that run across states and countries. We on our own must target the smaller areas before it is too late. N o m o r e s t a m p i n g logos of success on d i f f e r e n t interventions—let us enjoy the silence for a while and work hard. Success will come without us shouting about it.' It is remarkable, but as the year 2002 draws to a close there is both hope and despair. They cling together over the fate of both forest and wildlife. Late in 2002 the Supreme Court did the forests and wildlife of India a supreme service and a series of landmark judgments/ o r d e r s w e r e given b a s e d on the r e c o m m e n d a t i o n of our Committee. 1 As far as I am concerned, I learnt a lot about the legal system and its impact on our wilderness in 2002. I also realized that without legal intervention nothing is safe. If there is a fear in the enforcer of law or even the violator of law it comes from the courts. My work with the Central Empowered Committee has been a great learning experience. By November 2002 and after the K u d r e m u k h j u d g m e n t 2 there were efforts to d i s b a n d the committee. It is typical of India that when important work is being done someone somewhere wants to neutralize it. But we carry on. 1. See Appendix IV. 2. See Appendix V.

370

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

In December 2002 just before the year turned I received the awful news of the snaring of a radio collared tigress in Panna, Madhya Pradesh. I Knew her well and watched her closely with my friend Dr R.S. Chundawat. Poachers had killed her and left her two seven month cubs orphaned. The ability of man to destroy is amazing. As the year closed I mourned her death. Only weeks before a tigress had been poisoned in Ranthambhore also leaving behind two helpless cubs. The battles for securing the wilderness of India in the twenty-first century would be enormous—my fingers are crossed that a younger generation of both forest officer and those outside government will find ways to work together strategically. This is the only hope for the future. The right team that enforces n e w laws and court orders, with a spirit of togetherness.

Appendix I

B

urton never stopped writing his missiles and by 1950 was repeatedly reminding the government of the state of affairs and its failures. His memorandum was minutely detailed. The memorandum is reproduced here from The Preservation of Wildlife in India, a compilation by R. W. Burton (1953), Bangalore: Bangalore Press, pp. 14-51: A Memorandum Memorandum submitted by Lieut. Colonel R. W. Burton on 16 October 1950 to the Under Secretary to the Government of India in the department of scientific research, New Delhi, for use by the subcommittee constituted by the Advisory Committee for Coordinating Scientific Work to examine and suggest ways and means for setting up national parks and sanctuaries in India. The sub-committee met at New Delhi on 23 and 24 July 1951.

1. Preliminary—(a) It is suggested that the Sub-Committee consider this Memorandum para by para and make suitable suggestions to the Advisory Committee. (b) It is also suggested that the Sub-Committee Members refresh their memories by reading through the original pamphlet, J.B.N.H.S,

372

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Vol. 47, No. 4, August 1948 and the Supplement to it Vol. 48, No. 2 of April 1949. (c) Some of the Members may not possess these. Suggest the references may be made available to them on loan from the Office concerned; also other references mentioned in this Memorandum. 2. Legislation—National Parks—The several National Parks Acts enacted in India are not available to me. So far as I know, these Acts have not provided for the Board of Trustees system of control which has been considered in other countries (U.K. and Kenya) as giving the greatest security. 'Government and policies change, demands based on economic needs or political expediency arise which, though they may be of a temporary nature only, it may be difficult for the Government to resist, and a Park established by an Ordinance could with moderate ease be modified or abolished by another.'...' The areas chosen can be leased by the Crown (The State) to the Trustees for a period of 999 years, the Trustees being empowered to carry out their duties in accordance with the condition laid down in the Deed of Trust... lease is harder to break (than an Ordinance) and, in our opinion, gives the greatest security, which is the goal at which we aim.' 3. I suggest that a National Edifice designed to last a thousand years should have the best possible foundation. Perhaps, in India, Trustee System is not necessary. The Law Officers will know. Whatever is the more secure may be adopted. 4. Two Kinds of Parks—The Sub-Committee will doubtless have in mind two kinds of National Parks. No. 1 Wildlife purposes only. No. 2 Dual purposes, viz., for both wildlife and monuments. . 5. Definitions. No. 1—An area dedicated by Statute for all time to and for the people for the preservation of the flora and fauna of the selected area in all its aspects. No. 2—'An area dedicated by Statute for all time to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the

APPENDIX

III

373

enjoyment of future generations.' (p. 565, Proceedings and Papers, International Technical Conference for the Protection of Nature, Lake Success, 22-29, VIII, 1949). 6. Number and Location—No. 1. Suggest there may be as far as possible one in each State and Union. (a) ASSAM—Suggest that the lately Gazetted Tirap Frontier National Park be not further proceeded with as regards Tourists. It may be tried out as a sanctuary for the species that are now in it. As to Frontier National Parks reference may be had to the beforementioned Lake Success Proceedings and Papers. Suggest that at the present time it is not expedient to form any National Park or Sanctuary having any part of the area contiguous to any of the Frontiers of the Republic of India. (b) ASSAM—Suggest possibility of a National Park along Dimapur, Nichuguard, Kohima, Mao, Karong and Imphal to the Loktak Lake of Manipur State as suggested by Mr. E.P. Gee, see Vol. 49, p. 87. (c) Of No. 2 suggest Mount Abu and such area around the Hill as may be available for a dual-purpose National Park. The Sub-Committee will have other places in mind for similar purposes (Mandu, Parasnath and others). 7. Zoological Parks—These, on the lines of Whipsnade Park in England, are suggested as show places attractive to tourists of other countries, and for the instruction and enjoyment of the people of cities and large towns: Bombay, Calcutta, Allahabad, Jaipur, Delhi, Nagpur, Jubbulpur, Indore, Gwalior, Hyderabad, Mysore, Bangalore, Madras may be mentioned; there are others also. (a) Area of such Zoo Parks may approximate 500 acres or one square mile. They will require secure and permanent fencing all round the perimeter. (b) It is in mind that in these Parks, birds and animals should not be confined in cages but afforded the greatest possible liberty—carnivore included. For the two articles descriptive of Whipsnade, see Vol. 36, p. 378 and Vol. 39, p. 321.

374

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(c) It is envisaged that these Zoo Parks would become completely self-supporting, enhance the wildlife prestige of India, and be much appreciated by all classes of the people in the several States and Unions. (d) Amenities—For each of these parks there would need to be provided a small, well-designed township of strictly enclosed and limited extent with suitable Hotels, Restaurants, Garages and other accommodation for the visitors of all classes; also a Bazar, Market, etc. Rail communication is desirable; otherwise good and sufficient approach roads. Near the entrance gates would be motor vehicle and cycle-parking places. (f) Water—Where at all possible, sites selected for Zoo Parks and Peoples' Parks (see below) should have running streams or canals passing through or near them. 8. Peoples' Parks—(a) Nearly all that is in mind as to these is in para 12 of the Wildlife Supplement. (b) To that is now added that all these Parks should contain sheets of water to attract wildfowl and waders. In New Zealand, small Municipal Parks on the above lines are a great asset to the towns, especially in the South Island. Establishments for both the above Parks would be arranged by the cities and towns with which they are linked. The Staff designations might be Park Superintendent, Officer, Assistant, Attendant and the uniforms designed accordingly. 9. National Parks: Establishments—Suggest these should necessarily be separate from the Forest Department establishments. (a) Personnel in all grades may, at the commencement, be obtained from the forest department by nomination and by selection from among applicants from the forest department cadres. (b) In some of the grades ex-military men might be employed. (c) It is in mind, based on observation in India, Burma, Ceylon that guards and watchers had best not be from among neighbouring populations. (d) Designations—Suggest Warden, Deputy Warden, Assistant Warden, Park Superintendent, Ranger, Guard, Watcher, Fire-Watcher, Attendant for the several grades.

APPENDIX

III

375

(e) Dress: As may be designed. In case of ranks below Ranger suggest 'National Park' on headdress with designation on chest. From Warden to Ranger inclusive shoulder strap indications of status. 10. Training—As may be arranged, (a) Suggest three Officers may be deputed soon as may be, to America, Europe, United Kingdom to acquire knowledge of principles, methods, and all useful details regarding National Parks, game control, conservation and management. (b) Suggest these three Officers should possess B.Sc. Degree, have wildlife preservation at heart, and have force of character. (c) They would have much to learn, and much would depend upon them in regard to success of National Parks and Sanctuaries in India. (d) In due course compilation of Manual would be necessary. (e) Salaries—These would be suggested by the Sub-Committee and the Advisory Council and be decided by the governments. They might approximate those of the forest department in the corresponding grades. 11. General Remarks—Suggest that at the present time there is urgency in selecting, demarcating and providing for the layout and administration of the areas to be devoted to the purpose of wildlife national parks where such are contemplated. 12. Selection of Area—A long-term view, fifty years and more, with much forethought and mature consideration is necessary. Every aspect has to be weighed and considered; for it can be anticipated that within the stated number of years all usable land will be required for the everadvancing claims of agriculture, forestry and other human activities. Therefore, so far as can be foreseen, none such should now be taken up for a National Wildlife Park. 13. Suggest the Selection Committee should be composed of representatives of all departments concerned, together with two or three co-opted non-official members. 14. Points to Consider—(a) The area should comprise natural game country having abundant water, food and cover for all the creatures in it. (b) Size should be large enough to prevent overcrowding of species and permit of overflow into contiguous Reserved Forests which should be on at least three sides of the park.

376

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(c) It may be eventually necessary to have much of the park protected by fences. (d) The area should contain no human habitations other than those required for essential Warden and Park Control Establishments. (e) Forest Operations—There can be no extraction of timber and other forest products other than providing essential needs of the park; also no mining, quarrying, or water-supply project other than for essential need of the park area. (0 Type of Forest should be such as to allow animals being seen by visitors—in some parts from the roads and others from elephant back. (g) The park should be not too far from considerable areas of population. (h) Should be served by roads existing, or to be improved or made, and have motorable roads within it for visitors and paths for the riding elephants on hire for the visitors. (i) Water—For this a very long view is necessary. There must be an ample and perennial supply for all species; and for the park establishments and the visitors. Tanks, or sheets of water, or marshes are a very great asset. (j) Food and Grazing—Needs of all the creatures have to be thought of and provided. In fact, the vital question of food has to be considered in all its aspects and for all seasons of the year. (k) Environment—All animals depend for their existence upon suitable environment, and this should be preserved as near as may be, intact. (1) Size of the park has to vary according to availability of land and requirements. (m) Natural Salt licks are essential to every park and are of vital importance to the conservation of wildlife. Because of their attraction to the animals they should be improved if necessary and safeguarded from poachers in every possible way. 15. Lay-out—(a) There should be a system of broader and narrower fire lines and communication paths as obtains in well-managed reserved forests.

APPENDIX

III

377

(b) There would be suitably sited Quarters with water supply, by well if necessary, for Guards and Fire-Watchers at outlying parts. (c) Telephone communication would be established to connect these with the Park H.Q. Establishment Office near the Main Entrance. Along some of the paths tree machans for benighted patrolling staff may be necessary. 16. Management—(a) Basic to all success is need for trustworthy staff, Wardens have to be trained observers; able to train, discipline and educate their Establishments in all their duties; to inspire them with enthusiasm and real pride in the condition of their park and the well-being of the creatures under their charge. (b) Selection—From this it is obvious that all members of the staff have to be most carefully selected. They must be keen on the work before them; lovers of wildlife; of sound health and good physique; amenable to discipline; trustworthy, honest and as far as possible unrelated to neighbouring population. (c) In the upper grades they should be able to read and understand the wildlife literature, which should be provided. (d) A Manual would be compiled for their general guidance. (e) All Establishments should be well paid, housed and cared for at all times and all seasons. (f) There should be cordial relations and close cooperation between the Establishments of the National Park, the Forest Department, the Police, and Establishments of the Civil Administration in all essential grades. 17. Forestry—(a) It may be necessary to deforest selected patches of jungle to augment grazing. In these, and in jungle valleys, and along the wider fire lines annual grass burning is a necessity; for neglect in this allows of excessive growth of bush and thorny scrub which comes up with great rapidity, blocks the glades, and through increasing denseness of vegetation causes migration from the area of species such as sambar and spotted deer. (b) The narrower fire lines and the footpaths should be annually cleared by hand implements.

378

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(c) Where exotic fodder plants, such as clover, have been safely introduced in the not far distant parts of the same tract of country, the cultivation of them could be added with advantage to the local grazing supplies. Advice of scientists could be obtained. (d) To promote prosperous breeding seasons there has to be plenty of grazing and water. Where there are elephants, rhinoceros, buffalos, bison their needs have also to be thought of. (e) For some animals—bears, monkeys, squirrels and for birds, fruitbearing trees and shrubs should be planted. (f) Near selected salt licks there could be suitably constructed treeplatforms to enable approved visitors (on payment) enjoy the sight of wild animals in a state of natural environment. 18. Census—(a) Basic to any management measures is as accurate as possible knowledge of the size of the population, and the yearly changes in its size. (b) To the above end repeated censuses should be the basis of intelligent management of game resources. The reduction of stock, if necessary, should include the culling of female animals, and of males also should that be indicated. (c) Habitat improvement through modification of timber and grazing arrangement can be made to increase game-carrying capacity. 19. Carnivora—It would be necessary to maintain the right balance between carnivore and herbivore. 19A. Park Management includes encouragement of the deer, pig and monkey population to provide food for the larger carnivore and so lessen depredations on domestic stock outside the area. Wild dogs would have to be destroyed as interfering with food supply of tigers and panthers. 20. Crocodiles—The Park staff would take any measures found necessary in respect to these animals. 21. Elephants—Control as regards these and all other animals so that they do not unduly conflict with the use of land for production purposes is the duty of the Park Warden and his Establishments. It is the duty of the Warden to keep the population of game and wild fauna within reasonable bounds.

APPENDIX

III

379

22. Education of Public—Research by scientists, and management by Warden and Staff should be complemented by education of the public in general, and in the neighbourhood of the Park in particular so that they may support the programme. 23. Sanctuaries—Selection of areas to be declared as sanctuaries within reserved forests has always been decided by the forest department, and this excellent arrangement should continue. 24. Special Sanctuaries—Conditions governing what may be termed 'special sanctuaries' which may be used as show places for tourists, and may perhaps in some cases eventually attain the status of National Park, are contained in para 19 of Wildlife Supplement. To that para should now be added para I4(m) above as to salt licks. Some of the other paragraphs in 14 are also applicable to formation of'special sanctuaries'. 25. Preservation and Guarding—It has been remarked in several places by others as well as myself that laws, rules and orders in respect to guarding the forests and shooting within them are excellent in themselves, but the difficulty lies in enforcement. That applies to both inside and outside the forests. 26. Legislation—Game Act, Bombay State—In the Bombay State at the present time a New Game Act is at the stage of being enacted. It is suggested that this Act may be taken by the other States and Unions as a model on which to frame their own Acts and Rules. I have had something to do with the drafting but have not seen the final draft so might have some suggestions to make. The text of the Act, 'The Bombay Wild Birds and Wild Animals Protection Act, 1951'—together with Statement of Objects and Reasons, is at pp. 818-852 ofVol. 49, No. 4 (1949). Provision is made in the Act for confiscation of firearms by the convicting Court, but not of 'vehicles' as I urged should be done in conformity with the Excise Act (see under Poaching). Definition of 'animal' is omitted. It might be: '"animal" means any animal alive or dead whether vertebrate or invertebrate or any portion thereof and includes a bird, fish or reptile.'

380

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

'Vegetation' is not defined: it might be: 'vegetation includes any form of vegetable matter alive or dead' 'trap' needs definition: '"trap" includes any contrivance or device by means of which any animal can be captured, injured or killed.' Schedule I. Vermin—This is defective in that neither all species of Bats nor all Birds of Prey are harmful to the interests of man or of wildlife conservation; indeed, some of each of these species are directly beneficial to man's interests. In the above respects the Bombay Act is not yet, as was hoped it would be, wholly satisfactory as a model to be used as a guide to similar Acts in other States and Unions. The Rules under the Act are not yet to hand.—R. W. B., November 1952. 27. Trapping and Snaring—Again it is urged that the time has long gone by for Nomadic Tribes and other persons who gain their living by trapping and snaring of game birds, antelope, gazelle and other creatures to be turned to other pursuits. Thousands of people have been deprived of their hereditary occupations and turned to other pursuits in the interests of the prohibition campaign. These harmful trappers and snarers could be dealt with in a similar manner—and with good reason, for they are exterminating birds and animals which are the inherited asset of the people and the State. Notices could be issued to all such who are licensed that these are terminated from a stated date. Alternative to that is the disappearance of some species and the eventual extermination of others. 28. Poaching—(a) In two respects the Laws and Rules need important amendment: Poaching through use of the motor vehicle and Poaching through use of the electric torch. Unless these two forces of destruction are halted, the larger wildlife of India is doomed to extermination. That is my contention. (b) An essential of game preservation is the prevention of the 'commercialization' of game. Much of the poaching done—in South

APPENDIX

III

381

India at any rate—is for gain by sale of the meat or other products of animal. (c) It is necessary, I submit, that the Laws and Rules be amended to provide that in case of conviction, the Court may order confiscation of the motor vehicle, cycle, wheeled vehicle, firearm, torch or other gear used in the commission of the offence, in addition to any other penalty provided by the law. There is ample precedent in the Indian Excise Act and Rules; and now there is support from the United Kingdom: Editorial, The English Field newspaper, 6th May 1950: Salmon poaching penalties—After nearly two years of deliberation and taking of evidence the Government's Committee on poaching and illegal fishing for salmon and trout in Scotland has made its report. 'The Committee's recommendations for dealing with the situation may be briefly summarized as: adequate penalties upon conviction; the introduction of licences for the sale of salmon and trout; the obligation to mark packages of salmon and trout when dispatching by post or rail; the forfeiture of all gear including motor cars on conviction. There are, of course, other suggestions for greater efficiency in detail. The Tweed (England) has already provision whereby carts for transporting the illegal fish are subject to forfeiture. This provision, which should include motor cars, quite definitely, ought to be made applicable to the whole country. It would be best to make the provision compulsory on conviction, and not leave it to the discretion of the lower Court' (my italics). This is good precedent for my proposal that provision needs to be made, in India, for the confiscation of motor vehicle in case of a conviction for poaching. (d) My contention is that the preservation of game animals, which are the property of the State and a National Asset, is of at least equal importance to the prevention of smuggling of opium, liquor and other things penalized under the Excise Act (Recently—1950—in the Madras State, in a liquor smuggling case, the order of the Court confiscating the motor vehicle was upheld on appeal to the High Court). (e) It naturally at once jumps to the mind that, from one point of view, some of the subordinate staffs entrusted with the enforcement of

382

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

the game laws will joyfully welcome this new idea; while others who are loyal to the necessity of preserving the animals from destruction, will acclaim the extra power given for the suppression of offences. (f) The new Bombay Act has accepted the idea as to firearms, but not as to motor vehicles. Half measures are seldom effective. (g) The Sub-Committee may carefully consider all the above and make recommendation to the Advisory Committee. (h) A recent Amendment to the Ceylon Ordinance gives power to halt and examine motor vehicles passing along certain roads. Such provision might with advantage be adopted in India. 29. Royalties—(a) The Sub-Committee may recommend that the system of Royalties provided in the Assam Rules should be introduced into Reserve Forest Shooting Rules of all States and Unions. (b) I can see no objection to this system. Sportsmen who can afford the many expenses entailed by shooting big game can be reasonably asked to make this further contribution towards the expenses incurred by the State in conserving the animals for their sport. 30. Rewards for Carnivora—Within Reserved Forests there should be no rewards for killing tiger or panther, except in case of those which have to be proclaimed. Rewards for wild dogs should remain and be sufficiently attractive. 31. Bird Sanctuaries—(a) In Ceylon there are upwards of 20 bird sanctuaries, in India almost none. There are indications that the people in rural areas would give good support to bird protection, except perhaps where the species is desired for food. (b) Bird Sanctuaries are desirable all over the country, and the SubCommittee may so recommend through the Advisory Committee to all States and Unions. (c) Wild fowl—At the Lake Success International Conference for the Protection of Nature in August 1949 it was shown that the decreasing number of migratory duck had become a matter of concern among Western nations. (d) It was considered that much could be done by prohibiting netting of wild fowl on lakes and smaller waters, and that every nation should

APPENDIX

III

383

be prepared to make the necessary sacrifices towards that end. Something on those line could be done by the governments and people of India. (e) In the Madras State indigenous duck and teal are afforded a close season from 1st June to 30th September. The period might be from 1st April and apply to all species of wild fowl and water birds. Under the guise of netting, both migratory and indigenous birds will be taken; also, at present, the people are taking the eggs and fledglings of indigenous duck, and that should be stopped. The Sub-Committee may recommend as above. 32. The Great Indian Bustard—(a) It is now a vanishing species and will surely be exterminated unless effective measures are taken to preserve it for the country. (b) The bird lays only one egg, is large and conspicuous, and is slaughtered for food by nomadic tribes and others. (c) The only remedy is to apply provisions of Act VIII of 1912 by Notification under Rules provided by the Act and give whole-year protection. At the same time all district officers in all States and Unions where the bustard is found should be directed to ensure by all means in their power that the Notification is obeyed. The Sub-Committee may recommend as above to the Advisory Committee. (d) The Lesser Florican is exceedingly scarce and needs whole-year protection. 33. Close Seasons—Game Birds—(a) The biological conditions of bird life strictly govern reproduction. Not only must birds be undisturbed during the breeding season, but equally during the preceding phases, and subsequently, until the young are able to fend for themselves. (b) Existing Schedules are all too complicated through attempting to give precise close seasons for this, that and other bird. For this reason they are confusing to even educated sportsmen and not understandable by many of the ordinary people (Vol. 47, pp. 778-80 may be seen in this regard). (c) Schedules might provide for all game, and some other birds, form th 15 February to 30th September as a common-sense close season.

384

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

34. Outside Reserved Forests—Paragraphs 27, 31, 32, 33 refer to these areas. 35. Within Reserved Forests—National Parks and Sanctuaries—(a) Some aspects of wildlife in these appear to be in considerable danger. (i) 'Forests can themselves become a menace to cultivation.' Deputy Prime Minister, Dehra Dun, 2nd April 1950. (ii) 'It is vital that the sentiment of the farmer must be raised against all animals that destroy his crop. It is only when the farmer cooperates with us in destroying wild animals, that we can hope to reduce the great loss incurred,' p. 10, Madras Information, June 1950. (iii) 'The biologists must give lists of harmful and useful birds and animals. While the friends of the cultivator should be encouraged in the National Parks the enemies must be exterminated. The biologists should give a finding whether campaigns should be started for the destruction of wild boars, porcupines, monkeys, bats and parrots who cause enormous damage to crops and gardens. Before any such campaigns are started it should be ascertained whether harmful repercussion ... upsetting balance of power ... An action which prima facie may appear sensible and desirable may have far-reaching and most unpleasant and unforeseen consequences 50 years hence.' Address by M.S. Randhawa, I.C.S., 36th Indian Science Congress, Allahabad, 64-1949, p. 4 of reprint in this Volume, (b) It is suggested the Sub-Committee may read all of Mr. Randhawa's Address and bear it in mind; also the above (i), (ii), (iii) when making recommendations to the Advisory Committee. 36. National Parks and Sanctuaries—It seems that many people have the idea that once these are created in large numbers, the game in the rest of the country can go, and the sooner the better. As regards game birds it is very wrong idea. Even now, partridges and jungle fowl are fast disappearing, and all the game birds are in need of protection.

APPENDIX

III

385

It is possible that, at certain seasons, partridges and other game birds may eat grain if given a chance. But it may be regarded as certain that the damage done to crops is small, and is balanced by the good they do by destroying insect pests and seeds of harmful weeds. Partridges in particular are almost wholly beneficial, and he who would try to make out a case against them would be an ignorant man. The Sub-Committee may keep in mind that much as will be the good resulting from well-cared-for and well-guarded national parks and sanctuaries, there is need for game preservation throughout the rest of the country [see Vol. 48, No. 4, p. 293, para 13 (iii)] 37. Funds for Wildlife—(a) The Sub-Committee may see the List at p. 617, Vol. 47, No. 4, August 1948 and consider that revenue should aid the source from which derived, and make suitable recommendations. (b) In France there is a Special Contribution towards game conservation automatically levied at same time as licence fees. This is earmarked and cannot be used for any other purpose. It is suggested this logical item may be added as item 18 of the List and apply to items 4, 6, 7. 38. Obiter Dicta—The following are taken from various papers contributed by experts to the International Congress, Lake Success, August 1949 and presented as useful to keep in mind. (a) 'Game' should include Mammals, Birds, Reptiles. 'Animal' means any vertebrate animal other than a domestic animal. (b) The management of wildlife resources both animals and birds, can only be established on a scientific basis. (c) Any wild animal population must not only be undisturbed during its breeding season but equally during the preceding phases. (d) In respect to all projects and measures concerning wildlife there should be a wholly accurate background of scientific knowledge and research. (e) Conservation and Control must be combined into a common policy. There should be a balanced picture of control, as well as conservation; that is, conservation means preservation plus control. (f) Conservation implies the preservation in perpetuity of a reasonable quantity of game and wild fauna on account of their educational,

386

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

scientific, economic, recreational and aesthetic value. 'An important principle of conservation is the utilization of natural resources for the benefit of mankind' (Hubback). 'Conservation means the management of plant and animal life' (D.E. Wade, p. 33,1U.P.N. Proceedings and Papers, Lake Success Conference). (g) Control implies the need, which is growing fast, as human population increases, to keep the population of game and wild fauna within reasonable bounds, so that the animals do not unduly conflict with the use of land for production purposes. (h) Game Control may be defined as the sum total of the measures that must be taken in the interests of man's crop, lands, cattle, etc. (j) Game Control has a hundred aspects and a thousand facets; on its successful prosecution depends the survival of much of the larger indigenous fauna of any country, and of the game also. (k) Game Control needs exact knowledge and experience and cannot be left to casual effort. (1) Game Conservation means the management of game in the interests of the animals and the people using the land. And there are the troubles from the upset of the balance of nature. (m) Game Preservation means the shielding of game from man and his instinct to kill. (n) Once disregard of the law is allowed to start, there is not stopping it. (o) There should be no kind of admission that a man may hunt to provide himself and his dependents with food. (p) Game Reserves and other areas which cannot be properly administered become the happy hunting ground of poachers. (q) National Parks, Sanctuaries, Reserves must be adequately guarded. '"Adequate" means a staff, well-trained, loyal, trustworthy and having enthusiasm and real pride in the well-being of the flora and fauna under their charge' (Keith Caldwell) ('clarification' of that is a Wildlife Department, or similar organization within the forest department). 39. International Forestry Conference, Mysore, April 1949.

APPENDIX

III

387

The closing Resolution: 'It is recommended that forests be zoned into Strict Natural Reserves, National Parks and Intermediate Areas, and a system of Sanctuaries, close seasons and rest periods within open seasons. Effective steps should be taken to check unlicensed and unrestricted forms of killing and capture, and that protective measures be adopted for the preservation of threatened species by declaring them to be partially or absolutely protected, and a rigorous control and prevention of the sale and export of both live animals and skins, and, if necessary, by a complete embargo.' 40. Close Season for Big Game—In a Note published in Vol 39, No. 3, p. 621, 'Close Seasons for Big Game—Are they beneficial?' Colonel R. C. Morris states the various breeding seasons and shows that, in the majority of cases, the protection a close season is supposed to afford is not, in fact, beneficial to the animals. The argument is: 'In view of the fact that during the close season a very large number of animals are slaughtered by poachers who cannot then be disturbed by sportsmen in the jungles, consider that a general close season in respect of big game should be abolished in South India.' I am in full agreement with that. The same argument would apply all over India. So far as law-abiding sportsmen are concerned no close season is necessary, and what he may, or may not shoot at is entered on his licence. 41. Lands—Multipurpose Projects—Apart from the Reserved Forests, National Parks and Sanctuaries now in existence or to be established in the future there are, in many parts of India, lands which have been or will be taken up by governments in connection with water-control projects, irrigation works and canals. All these are capable of more or less afforestation and wildlife development. There will be in the current records of the department of Scientific Research representations by the Director of Zoological Survey of India in this respect, and no doubt they are being considered by the Advisory Committee.

388

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

42. It is only the backward state of Indian Fisheries and the ineffective methods of fishing which have so far saved the river fisheries of India from utter ruin. It was this incredibly detailed work that was done in the early 1950s to redraft the wildlife laws for Bombay that was later to become the core of the 1972 Wildlife Protection Act.

Appendix II

Reproduced from The Preservation of Wildlife in India, a compilation by R. W. Burton (1953), Bangalore: Bangalore Press, pp. 165-73. Resolutions adopted by the central board for Wildlife at its first session held in Mysore from 25 November to 1 December 1952 1. Name: The central board for wildlife recommends that its name be changed to 'Indian Board for Wildlife', so as to specify its precise territorial limits for international purpose. 2. Declaration of the Central Board for Wildlife as an Institution of National Importance: Whereas India's heritage of wildlife is fast becoming a vanishing asset in respect of some of the country's notable animals, such as, lion, rhinoceros, tragopan, cheetah, etc. Whereas the preservation of the fauna of India and the prevention of the extinction of any species are a matter of great national importance, and Whereas protection and balance with natural and human environment are also matters of urgent national importance,

390

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The Central Board for Wildlife Recommends to the Government of India that, despite the existence of entry 20 'Protection of Wild Animals and Birds' in List II (State List) of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, the Central Board for Wildlife, with the marginally noted functions assigned to it under the Ministry of Food and Agriculture Resolution f. 7-110/51 -R, of the 4th April 1952, be declared by Parliament by Law to be an institution of national importance as envisaged in Items 62 and 64 of List I—Union List—of the VII Schedule to the Constitution more specifically as the proper exercise of the functions of the Board will involve recourse to action under one or more of the following entries in the Union and concurrent Legislative Lists: List I—Item 5—Arms, firearms, ammunition and explosives. List I—Item 13—Participation in the International Conferences, Associations and other bodies and implementing of decisions made thereat, e.g., the International Union for the Protection of Nature. List I—Item 41—Trade and Commerce with foreign countries; import and export across customs frontiers—in so far as living animals, trophies, skins, furs, feathers and other wildlife products are concerned. List I—Item 42—Inter-State Trade and Commerce with respect to matters specified against the preceding entry (No. 41). List I—Item 81—(Union List)—Inter-State migration (of wildlife). List III—Item 17 (Concurrent List)—Prevention of the extension from one State to another of infectious or contagious diseases or pests affecting men, animals or plants. List III—Item 33 (Concurrent List)—Trade and Commerce in and the production, supply and distribution of the products of industries where the control of such industries by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest. [Sub-Section (2) of Article 246 enables Parliament to make laws with reference to any of the matters enumerated in List III] (i) to devise ways and means for the conservation and control of wildlife through coordinated legislative and practical measures, with particular reference to seasonal and regional closures and

APPENDIX

III

391

declaration of certain species of animals as 'protected' animals and prevention of indiscriminate killing; (ii) to sponsor the setting up of National Parks, Sanctuaries and Zoological Gardens; (iii) to promote public interest in wildlife and the need for its preservation in harmony with natural and human environment; (iv) to advise Government of policy in respect of export of living animals, trophies, skins, furs, feathers and other wildlife products; (v) to prevent such other functions as are germane to the purpose for which the Board has been constituted. 3. Amendment of the Constitution of the Central Board for Wildlife Whereas the Constitution of the Central Board for Wildlife set up by the Government of India requires elaboration and amplification with a view to devising ways and means for the proper fulfilment of its aims and objects, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that each State Government should be requested to set up a State Wildlife Board consisting of representatives of various organizations and interests to deal with the day-to-day administration of local wildlife problems. Note: The coordination of the activities of the State Boards will be effected through the Central Board for Wildlife. (b) That Honorary Regional Secretaries should be appointed as the Board's representatives to cover on its behalf the various regions in India. Note: Appointment of Honorary Regional Secretaries will be made by the Government of India and duly notified in the Gazette of India. Each Regional Secretary will maintain liaison between the Central Board and the State Boards. It will be necessary to make provision for the travelling allowance of the Regional Secretaries for the journeys performed by them in their respective regions in the discharge of their duties assigned to them by the Board. (c) That Dr. S. L. Hora, Director, Zoological Survey of India and President, National Institute of Sciences, India should be appointed as the Honorary Secretary-General of the Board.

392

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(d) That for the day-to-day administration, an Executive Committee consisting of the following be constituted: The Non-Official Vice-Chairman (Chairman) The Regional Secretaries The Secretary General The Secretary of the Central Board (Secretary) Note: The Executive Committee will be vested by the Board with authority to function on its behalf in the disposal of day-to-day business. (e) that the Constitution of the Board should be so amended as to cover the above recommendation. 4. Executive Committee: Whereas it is necessary to provide the Executive Committee of the Board with authority to carry on the day-to-day business of the Board and to take action on its behalf while the Board is not in session. The central board for wildlife resolves (a) that the Executive Committee is vested with full powers to take necessary action in pursuance of the objects of the Board to deal with the day-to-day business of the Board and to address the Central Government and other authorities on various matters concerning the business of the Board; (b) that the Executive Committee will transact its business by circulation as far as possible and will meet at least once in 6 months; (c) that the Executive Committee will frame bye-laws for the disposal of its own business of the Board subject to the ratification of the Board; (d) that the proceedings of the Executive Committee shall be circulated to the members of the Board in the form of periodical Bulletins; (e) that in the event of a decision to be taken in respect of a State, the representative of the State concerned on the Board shall be co-opted; and (f) that the Executive Committee is authorized to make verbal alterations in the language of the Resolution to be presented to Government. 5. Thanks to Mysore Government. The central board for wildlife resolves

APPENDIX

III

393

That its grateful appreciation of the generous arrangements made for holding its Inaugural Session at Mysore should be conveyed to the Government of Mysore. In particular, the Board would like to convey its gratitude to His Highness the Rajpramukh for his unstinted hospitality and for the interest he has taken in the Proceedings of the Session. The Board also acknowledges with thanks the assistance rendered by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Mysore and his Staff in organizing visits to various institutions and making arrangements for the delegates. 6. Protection of Nature and Wildlife. Whereas the preservation of Nature in its unspoiled state is deemed essential for its educative and aesthetic value, Whereas wildlife in India is progressively diminishing, Whereas some of the wild animals have already become extinct or are on the verge of extinction, And Whereas the maintenance of an equilibrium between the vegetable kingdom and the animal kingdom and among the animals themselves is of importance to mankind. The central board for wildlife recommends that the attention of the state governments should be drawn to the need for: (a) The creation of National parks in conformity with the general objectives laid down by the International Union for the Protection of Nature and affiliated bodies, provided that should a State create a National Park, the advice of the Central Board for Wildlife will be taken to ensure its national character. Note: The term 'National Park' for this purpose would generally denote an area dedicated by statute for all time, to conserve the scenery and natural and historical objects of national significance, to conserve wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations, with such modifications as local conditions may demand. (b) The creation of Wildlife Sanctuaries (or Wildlife Refuges) of such size and in such numbers which the needs for the preservation of wildlife,

394

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

more particularly of the species which have become scarce or which are threatened with extinction, may demand. Note: 1 The expression 'Wildlife Sanctuary' shall denote an area constituted by the competent authority in which killing, hunting, shooting or capturing of any species of bird or animal is prohibited except by or under the control of the highest authority in the department responsible for the management of the Sanctuary. The boundaries and character of such a sanctuary will be kept sacrosanct as far as possible. Such sanctuaries should be made accessible to visitors. 2. While the management of sanctuaries does not involve suspension or restriction of normal forest operations, it would be generally desirable to set apart an area of 1 to about 25 square miles within a sanctuary where such operations may not be carried out, to ensure the nursing up of wildlife undisturbed by human activities. Such sacrosanct areas may be declared as 'Abhayaranya, i.e., a forest where animals could roam about without fear of man. Such a sanctuary within a sanctuary would also ensure the preservation of plant life unspoiled and undisturbed. 3. In the management of sanctuaries, control should be exercised over elements adverse to the maintenance of wildlife, including destruction of vermin and predators. In the case of any difficulty, expert advice may be obtained from the Central Board for Wildlife. 4. In the event of a sanctuary being located in one State contiguous to a sanctuary in another State, the desirable co-ordination may be affected through the Central Board for Wildlife. (c) Imposing restrictions on the issue of shooting permits and by the prohibition of shooting in State Forests of a particular species for such periods as may be deemed necessary in order to attain the objectives in regard to the preservation of wildlife. Note: Special 'preservation plots' may be constituted where plants of medicinal value or species of special botanical interest may need to be preserved along with or without wildlife. (d) Encouraging members of the public interested in wildlife to assist in the preservation of wildlife by appointing them as Honorary Wildlife Officers who will perform the duties and enjoy the powers and privileges of Forest Officers in respect of preservation of wildlife delegated to them.

APPENDIX

III

395

Note: All the Members of the Central and the State Wildlife Boards as well as Honorary Wildlife Officers should be issued with a badge of office and an identity card in consultation with the Central Board for Wildlife. (e) The setting up of Zoological Parks for the purpose of entertainment, recreation and study of animal life. Note: 1. These parks should provide ideal conditions for rescuing and multiplying any species on the verge of extinction. 2. A Zoological Park is different from a zoological garden, in as much as it provides space and secures conditions similar to those in the natural habitats for the housing of animals, which are not possible in zoological gardens. (f) Modelling the administration of zoological gardens of the various States along the lines of Alipore Zoo, Calcutta. Note: the maintenance of zoos at a high standard of efficiency is desirable, and advice in this respect may be obtained from the Honorary Secretary-General of the Central Board for Wildlife. (g) Declaring the following species as protected animals: (viii) Musk deer (i) Indian Lion (ix) Brow-antlered deer (ii) Snow Leopard (x) Pigmy Hog (iii) Clouded Leopard Cheetah (iv) (xi) Great Indian Bustard (xii) Pink-headed Duck. (v) Rhinoceros (xiii) White-winged Wood Duck. (vi) The Indian Wild Ass (vii) Kashmir Stag Note: This list is illustrative and not exhaustive and may have to be added to from time to time to suit local conditions. Legislation should be enacted where necessary to secure complete protection of these animals and birds which are on the verge of extinction. 7. Protection of the Lion Whereas the Indian lion, which not long ago was distributed throughout North-West India,

396

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Whereas the Indian lion has now receded to the confines of Gir Forest in Kathiawar Peninsula, and whereas the Indian lion is an animal of national importance requiring rigorous protection, The central board for wildlife Views with great alarm the dangers attendant upon concentrating the remnant lions in a single locality and not immune from epidemic and other unforeseen calamities; Recommends that an additional locality as a Sanctuary for the lions in a suitable area should be developed. In the selection of this locality, the original range and environment of the lion shall be taken into consideration. And Requests that the attention of the Government of Saurashtra should be invited to the need for associating the Central Board for Wildlife in the management of the lions of the Gir Forest. 8. Trading in Trophies, Skins, Furs, Feathers and Flesh; Whereas unrestricted trading in trophies, skins, furs, feathers and flesh is detrimental to the wildlife resources of the country, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that the export of trophies, as defined in the Bombay Protection of Wild Animals and Wild Birds Act 1951 (XXIV of 1951) should be prohibited except in cases which are covered by a Certificate of Ownership issued by the prescribed authority of the Central or State Governments such as Forest or Revenue Officers, etc., or whose ownership is otherwise established. Note: This provision will not apply to the re-export of trophies sent to India for finishing on the production of a certificate of the owner. (b) that legislative control of internal trade in trophies should, for the present, await the experience to be gained in the Bombay State where legislation in this respect is being brought into force shortly. (c) that, in the meanwhile, in order to discourage trading in trophies inside the country and to prohibit (a) the netting of birds and animals during 'close' periods, (b) their sale, (c) the sale of venison, (d) the sale of fish and parts of other wild animals, the Government of India should invite the attention of the State Governments to the advisability of enforcing the provisions of Act VIII of 1912, as amended from time to

APPENDIX

III

397

time, or such other legislation as might have been enacted or extended for the purpose. 9. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Whereas in the interests of wildlife, and for humane reasons, it is necessary to prevent cruelty to animals and birds during captivity and transit, The central board for wildlife recommends that the cooperation of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (S.P.C.A.) should be sought in this connection and that Honorary Wildlife Officers in every centre be requested to report all cases of cruelty to animals and birds in captivity and during transit. 10. Netting of Wild Birds and Animals. Whereas extensive netting of wild animals and birds is prejudicial to the maintenance of the balance of nature and is detrimental to the wildlife of the country, the Central Board of Wildlife recommends that the netting of wild animals and birds should be stopped during 'close' seasons and that no exemptions should be permitted on grounds of tribal or caste customs, livelihood, profession or usage. 11. Export and Import of Living Animals and Birds. Whereas the unrestricted export of living animals and birds tends to deplete the fauna of the country, And Whereas the unrestricted import of animals and birds is not in the interests of local fauna, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports be requested to fix the annual limits for the export of each valuable species of wildlife to zoos, scientific institutions and circuses outside India on the recommendation of the Secretary General of the Board, (b) that all requests for imports of living specimens of wild life by zoos, scientific institutions and circuses in India should be routed through the Honorary Secretary General of the Board, (c) that the excise duty to be levied on the export of animals for circuses should be double the duty levied on animals intended for bona fide zoos

398

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

and scientific institutions, provided that gifts and exchanges between bona fide zoos be exempt from such duties. (d) that the State Governments be requested to give priority to the requirements of zoos in India in respect of species of wildlife over the requirements of foreign zoos, provided that the restrictions contemplated in the aforesaid clauses shall not apply to exports of species classified as 'vermin'. Note: The phrase 'vermin' is defined in the Bombay Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act (XXIV of 1951) as 'any animal or bird declared to be vermin under Section 18'. 12. 'Close' Season. Whereas owing to lack of uniformity in the periods prescribed by different State governments as 'close' seasons, it is difficult for the Transport Authorities to keep a check on 'close' season offenders, The central board for wildlife recommends that movements of living birds be prohibited from 1st April to 30th September which, for all practical purposes, will be treated as 'close' season for purposes of transport. Note: This restriction will not apply to movement for bona fide purposes, e.g., exchange of specimens by zoos and transport of birds by circuses, etc. 13. Statistics Whereas it is essential for the Central Board to maintain statistics of species of wildlife, The central board for wildlife recommends that all State Governments be requested to furnish information on the following points to its Secretary-General: (a) urplus species held by their zoos for disposal, (b) species required by their zoos and (c) animals that can be captured in their forests. 14. Symposium. Whereas it is necessary to focus attention on problems of educating the public on the value of wildlife,

APPENDIX

III

399

And Whereas Zoos and National Parks are institutions for such education, The central board for wildlife recommends that symposium should be held at an early date on the (a) Indian Zoos, and (b) Management of National Parks and Sanctuaries so as to assist in the formulation of policies in regard to the maintenance of wildlife exhibits in the zoos and the management of National Parks and Sanctuaries. 15. Cooperation of Public in Enforcement of Measures for the Protection of Wildlife. Whereas it is necessary to secure public cooperation in the enforcement of measures or the protection of wildlife, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that members of the public interested in Nature should be invited to become Honorary Correspondents to the Board in matters relating to wildlife; and (b) that members of the Board should be appointed as Honorary Wildlife Officers on behalf of the Board in respect of the Resolutions and Recommendations passed and such instructions as may be issued from time to time by the Board. 16. Wildlife Legislation. Whereas it is necessary to preserve wildlife in the country as a whole, Whereas the existing machinery for the protection of wildlife in areas outside the purview of the Indian Forest Act XVI of 1927 or adaptations thereof, is inadequate, and Whereas the protection afforded to wildlife in areas within the purview of the Indian Forests Act XVI of 1927, or adaptations thereof, requires strengthening, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that necessary legislation be enacted at an early date by the Centre or the State Governments as the case may be. Note: The attention of State Governments is invited to the existing legislation for the protection of wildlife in various States and, in particular,

400

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

to the 'Bombay Wild Animals and Wild Birds Protection Act No. XXIV of 1951' and the Rules framed thereunder. 17. 'Close' Seasons, Illicit Shooting, etc. Whereas there is reason to believe that there is need for the amendment of existing 'close' seasons observed in respect of birds and animals, Whereas the list of animals and birds now treated as vermin needs reexamination with a view to limiting it to only those animals and birds which should be kept in check, Whereas in some parts of the country there is wholesale destruction of wildlife with the help of dogs, Whereas shooting from vehicles, with or without blinding spot or headlights, shooting with torches, shooting over salt licks and waterholes, destroying animals by using poisons, explosives and poisoned weapons, catching animals and birds by nets, traps, pits, snares, etc., and killing animals by driving them in snow or by fire require to be discouraged in the interests of the preservation of wildlife, And Whereas the use of buckshot wounds rather than kills animals, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that States do review, in consultation with the Central Board for Wildlife, and, if possible with their contiguous States, their 'close' seasons for the various animals and birds to be protected, (b) that States should re-examine their lists of 'vermin' from time to time to ensure that only harmful species are so classified, and (c) that the attention of State Governments be invited to the urgent need for devising ways and means and of adopting such measures, including enactment of legislation, to discourage if not to prohibit, these practices in the interests of wildlife. 18. Crop Protection Guns. Whereas indiscriminate slaughter of wildlife is often indulged in with the aid of guns ostensibly held for crop protection, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that ways and means be devised to ensure that guns issued for crop protection are used only for the protection of standing crops and

APPENDIX

III

401

that the use of such guns for hunting or shooting should be prohibited unless the licensee secures such other licences as are prescribed, (b) that the quantity and type of ammunition available to the holders of such guns should be restricted by the licensing authorities to such as is required for protection of crops only. Note: Licences should be generally issued for single-barrel guns only. 19. Buffer Belts Around Sanctuaries. Whereas much destruction of wildlife goes on in areas contiguous to sanctuaries, and Whereas cattle-borne diseases are spread in such sanctuaries by domestic cattle from surrounding areas, The central board for wildlife recommends that buffer belts of sufficient width be declared around all sanctuaries within which no shooting, other than required for legitimate crop protection, will be permitted and within which no professional graziers will be allowed to establish their cattle pens. 20. Inoculation against Cattle-borne Diseases. Whereas many preventable cattle-borne diseases among herbivorous wild animals result from contact with infected domestic cattle in the neighbourhood of 'forests', The central board for wildlife recommends that State Governments be requested to inoculate systematically and periodically domestic cattle in the neighbourhood of National Parks, Sanctuaries and Reserves where and when necessary. 21. Publicity. Whereas insufficient use is being made at present of the existing facilities of publicity afforded by the Press, Screen and Radio, for wildlife protection, The central board for wildlife recommends (a) that adequate publicity material be issued form time to time by the respective Central and State Publicity Departments in close collaboration with Forest Departments and other organizations, (b) that enthusiasts be approached to give publicity to wildlife,

402

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(c) that documentary films dealing with various aspects of wildlife be produced by Governments in consultation with the Central or State Boards for Wildlife for exhibition in both urban and rural areas, (d) that amateur cinema-photography of wildlife be encouraged, and (e) that the All India Radio be requested to afford special facilities for wildlife broadcasts. 22. Education. Whereas there is general lack of knowledge regarding conservation of nature and the value of wildlife, and Whereas it is essential to educate public opinion in matters of wildlife, The central board for wildlife recommends that special steps be taken to popularize wildlife by introducing stories in school textbooks, by producing attractive charts, by organizing special lectures and through the establishment of Zoos and Zoological Parks in the neighbourhood of large cities. 23. Liaison. Whereas for the purposes of education and publicity coordination of such Departments as Forest, Agriculture, Horticulture, Scientific Research, Transportation (Tourist), and Information and Broadcasting is essential, The central board for wildlife recommends that steps be taken through the Central and State Wildlife Boards to coordinate the activities of all connected Departments in matters of management, publicity and education concerning wildlife.

1

Appendix III

Recommendations of the Indian Board for Wildlife on Wildlife Sanctuaries: The Early Days Various resolutions relating to wildlife sanctuaries and national parks have been passed by the Indian Board for Wildlife and its executive committee at successive meetings from 1952 to 1961. These are to be found scattered here and there among resolutions on other subjects in the proceedings of the nine meetings, and it has been considered advisable to extract them and publish them in a compact form in the order in which they were passed. The relevant resolutions on wildlife sanctuaries are as follows: The creation of wildlife sanctuaries (or wildlife refuges) of such size and in such numbers where the needs for the preservation of wildlife, more particularly of the species which have become scarce or which are threatened with extinction, may demand. The expression 'wildlife sanctuary' shall denote an area constituted by the competent authority in which killing, hunting, shooting, or capturing of any species of bird or animal is prohibited except by or under the control of the highest authority in the department responsible for the management of the sanctuary. The boundaries and character of such a sanctuary should be made accessible to visitors.

404

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

While the management of sanctuaries does not involve suspension or restriction of normal forest operations, it would be generally desirable to set apart an area of one to about twenty-five square miles within a sanctuary where such operations may not be carried out, to ensure the nursing up of wildlife undisturbed by human activities. Such sacrosanct areas may be declared as abhayaranya, i.e., a forest where animals could roam without fear of man. Such a sanctuary within a sanctuary would also ensure the preservation of plant life unspoiled and undisturbed. In the management of sanctuaries, control should be exercised over elements adverse to the maintenance of wildlife including destruction of vermin and predators. In case of any difficulty, expert advice may be obtained from the Indian Board for Wildlife. In the event of a sanctuary being located in one State contiguous to a sanctuary in another State, the desirable co-ordination may be effected through the Indian Board for Wildlife. That buffer belts of sufficient width be declared around all sanctuaries within which no shooting, other than that required for legitimate crop protection, will be permitted and within which no professional graziers will be allowed to establish their cattle pens... and that State Governments be requested to inoculate systematically and periodically domestic cattle in the neighbourhood of national parks, sanctuaries and reserves where and when necessary. Inaugural Session, Mysore, 1952

Wildlife sanctuaries are areas ordinarily set apart by an Order of the State Government for the purpose of preserving wildlife. The management of such sanctuaries is adequately dealt with under Resolution 6: 'Protection of Nature and Wildlife' of the Mysore Session of the Board held in 1952. The Board recommends that sanctuaries conforming to the standards laid down under Resolution 6(b) of the Mysore Conference may be constituted as such. In many States there may be areas where it may be considered expedient: (i) to afford special protection to wildlife, in order to enable species of wildlife which are on the verge of extinction to re-establish themselves,

APPENDIX III

405

(ii) to afford protection to wildlife attracted to water impounded in river valley projects and to other irrigation work, and (iii) to afford protection to wildlife in and around large towns and sacred places. Such areas may be constituted by an Order of the Government which may also lay down the degree of protection. Second Session, Calcutta, 1955

That the State Governments take suitable steps for providing sufficient food and cover to wildlife in the sanctuaries. Fourth Session, Ootacamund, 1961

Recommendations of the Indian Board for Wildlife on National Parks There has been a slight but significant evolutionary change in the policy concerning legislation to be adopted for national parks in India. In 1952 and 1953 it was hoped that by a slight revision of Schedule VII of the Indian Constitution it would be possible to get national parks placed on List III (the Concurrent List). Later it was found that this was not possible, and so the anomaly became apparent that national parks, essentially an all-India affair, were a state subject and would have to be created by Acts of the state legislatures. In order to ensure the national character of such parks and uniformity in the various States, it was then decided to draw u p a model bill which would serve as a basis on which states could frame their own legislation for national parks. This model bill w a s circulated to all states for c o m m e n t s and suggested amendments and was then vetted by the law ministry. In its finalized form it was sent to all states in February 1957. The relevant resolutions on national parks in the proceedings of the successive meetings of the Indian Board for Wildlife and its executive committee are as follows:

406

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

The creation of national parks in conformity with the general objectives laid down by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and affiliated bodies. Provided that should a State create a national park, the advice of the Indian Board for Wildlife will be taken to ensure its national character. The term 'national park' for this purpose would generally denote 'an area dedicated by statute for all time, to conserve the scenery and natural and historical objects of national significance, to conserve wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations, with such modifications as local conditions may demand'. Inaugural Session, Mysore, 1952

It is essential that there should be uniformity in the management of national parks and the standards to be maintained should be of a high order. The main reason for the non-establishment of national parks in the country is that the State Governments are not in a position to finance wholly by themselves the establishment of national parks. National parks, the establishment of which has been recommended separately, may not come into being without central advice and assistance from the centre. In the United States 'national parks' is a federal subject and such parks are entirely financed and controlled by the Federal Government. The Central Government was contemplating amendment of the 7th Schedule of the Constitution (List of Union, State, and Concurrent Subjects) on the recommendation of the Commodity Controls Committee. Advantage of this fact should be taken and, therefore, Indian Board for Wild Life (IBWL) recommends to the Central Government that the subject of 'national parks' be added to List III (Concurrent List) in Schedule VII of the Constitution. Executive Committee, Kanha, 1953 National parks are areas set apart by an Act of the competent Legislature for permanent preservation. Such areas may have for their objective the preservation of one or more of the following features: geological, pre-historical, historical, archaeological, scenic, faunal, and floral.

APPENDIX III

407

It is not an essential condition of national parks that there should be no human intervention. Where it is desired to exclude human intervention altogether, it may be possible to set apart a suitable part within the national park—sanctum sanctorum—which may receive absolute protection. Such parks are not to be created lightly. In framing proposals for the constitution of national parks, the Board considers it desirable that State Governments should consult it and avail themselves of the technical knowledge and experience at its disposal. The Board recommends further that legislation to be enacted in various States for the creation and management of national parks should follow a common pattern. In order to facilitate this the Board will prepare and circulate a model draft bill. In order to ensure the national character of such parks, the Board recommends that in the authority set up under the legislation the Central Government and the Board be represented through the Inspector General of Forests or his nominee. Second Session, Calcutta, 1955

The Executive Committee resolved to advise the State Governments that pending the constitution of any sanctuaries into national parks, any attempt that might be made to change their existing character or whittle away their resources in any way should be guarded against. The Committee also authorised the Secretary to examine the feasibility of suggesting to the State Governments the desirability of referring their National Parks Bills to the Centre before presentation to the State Legislatures. The Committee examined the draft Model Bill clause by clause and made a number of suggestions in the Bill and requested the Inspector General of Forests to take into consideration the suggestions made and redraft the bill, also incorporating any suggestions that might be received from the members within the next 10 days. Thereafter, the bill was to be vetted by the Ministry of Law and circulated to State Governments. (Regarding the point whether it would be desirable to call these parks 'national' as these parks were to be constituted by State Governments)

408

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

the whole idea was to give a national character to the park. Some standards on a national level were to be laid down for all parks even though they were to be constituted by the State Governments in different States. A national character could be secured by having the Central Governments representation on the Board of Management. Furthermore, there was a proposal to give some financial aid to the parks by the Government of India. It would therefore be in the fitness of things to call them national parks. Executive Committee, Ootacamund, 1955

Model Bill for constitution of national parks which may be suitably adapted or added to, to provide for any special or local requirements. This Model Bill aims only at ensuring that the technical requirements will be fully covered in any State legislation regarding 'state parks'. As will be seen, it is considered best that each park in a State should be so constituted by a separate Act of the State Legislature. It would follow that any alteration or alienation of the area of the park would also require sanction of the Legislature. As the bill provides exclusively for action by the State in respect of an area entirely within the State, these parks, it is considered, may be designated as 'state parks'. Where a State would elect to dedicate any park so constituted for use for national purposes and agree to the management and control of the park to be put on a national basis, such dedicated parks could be adopted as 'national parks'. Central Government letter with model bill, February 1957

In keeping with international practice, the Committee decided that the national parks and sanctuaries should be kept open to visitors only dawn to dusk. Executive Committee, Shivpuri, 1959

The Board recommended that national parks may also be set up under the Acts of the State Legislatures, but before naming them as national parks the approval of the Board may be obtained. The Board will grant such approval only to such parks that will fulfil certain minimum requirements. Fourth Session, Ootacamund, 1961

APPENDIX I I I

409

Standards for National Parks in India: A Statement of National Park Policy I. Definition National Parks are areas 'dedicated by statute for all time, to conserve the scenery and natural and historical objects of national significance, to conserve wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will have them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations, with such modifications as local conditions may demand'. From this definition, passed at the Inaugural Session of the Indian Board for Wildlife in 1952, it follows: 1. That national parks must be areas of national significance to India as a whole, and of importance to the rest of the world, and not areas of mere local significance. 2. That the natural scenic beauty of the area must be carefully preserved so that it will remain unspoilt and unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. This means that there should be no forest operations such as the extraction of timber and planting of plantations in a national parks, unless they can be justified on the basis of the very pressing economic needs of the country. In areas of outstanding beauty or holding valuable fauna, where it may not be possible to forego such forest operations (where they are already being done), the natural scenic beauty should be preserved as far as possible, and certain areas should be left strictly protected as 'inner sanctuaries' or abhayaranya. 3. That the existing and indigenous wildlife of the area must be strictly preserved for the enjoyment of future generations. This implies that no 'foreign' or exotic species of fauna or flora should be introduced, though a species which once existed in the area and has within historical times become extinct can be re-introduced if an expert ecological study of the area favours such a step. A national park may preserve either rare and valuable species of fauna in danger of extinction, or typical fauna representative of the region, or a combination of both. 4. That development of the area must be carefully planned and executed so as to provide for its enjoyment by the public and by foreign

410

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

visitors in such a way as to leave the natural scenic beauty and wildlife unimpaired for future generations. This means that access roads should be made, and roads and paths inside the park for the use of visitors. And that rest houses and suitable accommodation should be provided. And that motor transport, riding elephants, boats and so forth be provided as local conditions may demand. 5. That national parks, wherever possible, must be of such size as to make them viable and ecological units, and comprehensive units embracing the amount of territory required for effective administration and the continuance of the representative fauna and flora. II. Legislation As wildlife is a State subject, the legislation for the creation of parks will be enacted by the State Legislature concerned. It is considered advisable that there should be a separate Act of the State Legislature for each park, and not a general Act or an enabling Act for several parks. It is recommended that the model bill, as drawn up by the Indian Board for Wildlife and approved of by the Law Ministry, should be used as a basis for any State Legislation, in order to ensure unanimity and all-India character in the parks of the country. As the term 'national' has a country-wide, all-India significance, it is recommended to State Governments that the standards as laid down should be strictly adhered to, and that the approval of the Indian Board for Wildlife be obtained before designating a park as a national park. A park in a State can then be dedicated to the nation, and become a national park. Existing national parks in the country which are up to the standards laid down should remain as originally constituted. III. Administration In administering national parks it is recommended: 1. That for each national park, or for the national parks of each State, there should be a Management or Advisory Board or Committee consisting of members of the Government and Forest Department, eminent conservationists, representatives of public interests and so on. At any time considered desirable, the advice of the Indian Board for Wildlife should be sought.

APPENDIX III

411

2. That national parks be administered with the primary objective of conserving the scenic beauty and wildlife in their natural state, and of preserving and safeguarding all objects within them. And that management, control, modifications and other such human intervention be done only under expert advice and in conformity with the standards as laid down. 3. That, wherever possible, buffer belts or buffer zones of sufficient width be constituted outside the boundaries of national parks, in order to ensure their inviolability—especially against poaching, grazing by domestic cattle, cattle-borne diseases, cutting of vegetation and so on. 4. That undesirable commercial activities and non-conforming recreational activities be avoided, as violations of the standards as laid down. Fishing with rod and line for sport, subject to local regulations, is permissible in national parks. 5. That carefully planned and restricted forest operations be permitted only when there are overriding reasons to justify them, such as the pressing economic need for timber and the revenue derived from it. In such cases steps must be taken to preserve the scenic beauty and to set aside preservation plots, inner sanctuaries or abhayaranya. 6. That roads and paths be constructed to enable visitors to see and enjoy the scenic beauty and wildlife and for the purpose of administering and protecting the area, with the least interference with the natural scenery. 7. That buildings for accommodation of visitors and staff be constructed, but that they be as unobstructive as possible and in harmony with their surroundings. While luxury for visitors is not recommended or desirable, there should be a high standard of the basic requirements of the present-day traveller. 8. That appropriate steps be taken to provide publicity to attract visitors from within the country and tourists from abroad. In addition, full information on each park should be available in the form of a wellillustrated booklet, which will be of use not only to visitors but also for educational purposes. The services of guides should be available, if required by foreign visitors. Picture postcards and other mementoes should be available for sale, if there is a demand for them.

412

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

9. That every step taken in the development and use of national parks conforms to the standards, so that the area may be left unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. If ever any doubt may arise, the ultimate interests of the people of the whole country and of future generations should be taken into account. What a difficult moment of time this was for India's forests and wildlife. Endless monocultures were promoted in forest areas and some superb primary forests were lost forever. Few Indians used the camera or the pen for wildlife. M. Krishnan and M.K. Dharmakumarsinhji were the only two who had been writing for more than a decade. The Corbetts and Champions were gone and there was an army out there destroying Indian forests.

Appendix IV

Kudremukh Judgment of the Supreme Court on 30 October, 2002 In a landmark judgment of forty-six pages the Supreme Court of India endorsed the decision of the Forest Advisory Committee, a committee that is a s t a t u t o r y a u t h o r i t y u n d e r the Forest Conservation Act to wind up the Kudremukh Iron Ore Company mining within Kudremukh National Park by 2005. They also endorsed the recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee, also a statutory authority under the Environment Protection Act. These issues were of vital importance to our protected area system. Quoted below are details of the case and extracts from the judgment. Civil Original Jurisdiction I.A.No.670 of 2001 In Writ Petition (C) No.202/1995 [K.M. Chinnappa (Applicant) in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (Petitioner)—Versus—Union of India and Others (Respondents)] Extracts (1) 'By destroying nature, environment, man is committing matricide, having in a way killed Mother Earth. Technological excellence, growth

414

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

of industries, economical gains have led to depletion of natural resources irreversibly. Indifference to the grave consequences, lack of concern and foresight have contributed in large measures to the alarming position. In the case at hand, the alleged victim is the flora and fauna in and around Kudremukh National Park, a part of the Western Ghats. The forests in the area are among 18 internationally recognized "Hotspots" for bio-diversity conservation in the world.' (2) 'The seminal issue involved is whether the approach should be "dollar friendly" or 'eco friendly'. 'Environment' is a difficult word to define. Its normal meaning relates to the surroundings, but obviously that is a concept which is relatable to whatever object it is which is surrounded. Einstein had once observed, 'The environment is everything that isn't me.' About one and half century ago, in 1854, as the famous story goes, the wise Indian Chief of Seattle replied to the offer of the great White Chief in Washington to buy their land. The reply is profound. It is beautiful. It is timeless. It contains the wisdom of the ages. It is the first ever and the most understanding statement on environment. The whole of it is worth quoting as any extract from it is to destroy its beauty. How can you buy or sell the sky, the warmth of the land? The idea is strange to us. If we do not own the freshness of the air and the sparkle of the water, how can you buy them? Every part of the earth is sacred to my people. Every shining pine needle, every sandy shore, every mist in the dark woods, every clearing and humming insect is holy in the memory and experience of my people. The sap which courses through the trees carries the memories of the red man ...'. It would be hard to find out such dawn to earth description of nature. 'Nature hates monopolies and knows no exception.' (3) The Stockholm Declaration of United Nations on Human Environment, 1972, reads its Principle No.3, inter alia, thus: 'Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality, and adequate conditions of life. In an environment of equality that permits a life of

APPENDIX

III

415

dignity and well-being and bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations.' It is necessary to avoid massive and irreversible harm to the earthly environment and strife for achieving present generation and the posterity a better life in an environment more in keeping with the needs and hopes. In this context immediately comes to mind the words of Pythagoras who said: 'For so long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings, he will never know health or peace. For so long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, they who sow the seeds of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love.' (4) Article 48-A in Part IV (Directive Principles) of the Constitution of India, 1950 brought by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, enjoins that 'State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.' Article 47 further imposes the duty on the State to improve public health as its primary duty. Article 51-A(g) imposes 'a fundamental duty' on every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural 'environment' including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures. (5) Industrialisation, urbanisation, explosion of population, overexploitation of resources, depletion of traditional sources of energy and raw materials, and the search for new sources of energy and raw materials, the disruption of natural ecological balances, the destruction of multitude of animal and plant species for economic reasons and sometimes for no good reason at all are factors which have contributed to environmental deterioration. While the scientific and technological progress of man has invested him with immense power of nature, it has also resulted in the unthinking use of the power, encroaching endlessly on nature. If man is able to transform deserts into oasis, he is also leaving behind deserts in the place of oasis. In the last century, a great German materialist philosopher warned mankind: 'Let us not, however, flatter ourselves over much on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third

416

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first.' (6) To protect and improve the environment is a constitutional mandate. It is a commitment for a country wedded to the ideas of a Welfare State. The world is under an impenetrable cloud. In view of enormous challenges thrown by the Industrial revolution the legislatures throughout the world are busy in their exercise to find out means to protect the world. Every individual in the society has a duty to protect the nature. People worship the objects of nature. The trees, water, land and animals had gained important positions in the ancient times. As Manu VIII, page 282 says different punishments were prescribed for causing injuries to plants. Kautilya went a step further and fixed the punishment on the basis of importance of the part of the tree. (See Kautilya III, XIX, 197). (7) The Academy Law Review at pages 137-8 says that a recent survey reveals that everyday millions of gallons of trade wastes and effluents are discharged into the rivers, steams, lake and sea, etc. Indiscriminate water pollution is a problem all over the world but is now acute in densely populated industrial cities. Our country is no exception to this. Air pollution has further added to the intensity and extent of the problem. Every year millions of tons of gaseous and particulate pollutants are injected into the atmosphere, both through natural processes and as a direct result of human activity. Scientists have pointed out that earth's atmosphere cannot absorb such unlimited amount of pollutant materials without undergoing changes which may be of adverse nature with respect to human welfare. Man in order to survive in his planetary home will have to strike the harmonious balance with nature. There may be boundless progress scientifically which may ultimately lead to destruction of man's valued position in life. The Constitution has laid the foundation of Articles 48-A and 51-A for a jurisprudence of environmental protection. Today, the State and citizen are under a fundamental obligation to protect and improve the environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures. (8) A learned Jurist has said, the Rig Veda praises the beauty of the dawn (usha) and worships Nature in all its glory. And yet today a bath in the Yamuna and Ganga is a sin against bodily health, not a salvation for

APPENDIX

III

417

the soul—so polluted and noxious are these 'Holy' waters now. 'One hospital bed out of four in the world is occupied by a patient who is ill because of polluted water ... Provision of a safe and convenient water supply is the most important activity that could be undertaken to improve the health of people living in rural areas of the developing world' (W.H.O.). 'Nature never did betray. That heart that loves her' (Wordsworth). The anxiety to save the environment manifested in the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act, 1976 by the introduction of a specific provision for the first time to 'protect and improve' the environment. (9) The State is the trustee of all natural resources which are by nature meant for public use and enjoyment. Public at large is the beneficiary of the seashore, running waters, airs, forests and ecologically fragile lands. The State as a trustee is under a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These resources meant for public use cannot be converted into private ownership. (10) The aesthetic use and the pristine glory cannot be permitted to be eroded for private, commercial or any use unless the courts find it necessary, in good faith, for public good and in public interest to encroach upon the said resources. (11) Sustainable development is essentially a policy and strategy for continued economic and social development without detriment to the environment and natural resources on the quality of which continued activity and further development depend. Therefore, while thinking of the developmental measures the needs of the present and the ability of the future to meet its own needs and requirements have to be kept in view. While thinking the present, the future should not be forgotten. We owe a duty to future generations and for a bright today, bleak tomorrow cannot be countenanced. We must learn from our experiences of past to make both the present and the future brighter. We learn from our experiences, mistakes from the past, so that they can be rectified for a better present and the future. It cannot be lost sight of that while today is yesterday's tomorrow, it is tomorrow's yesterday. (12) The greenery of India should not be allowed to be perished, to be replaced by deserts. Ethiopia which at a point of time was considered to be one of the greenest countries, is virtually a vast desert today.

418

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(13) It is, therefore, necessary for the Government to keep in view the international obligations while exercising discretionary powers under the Conservation Act unless there are compelling reasons to depart there from. (14) The United Nations Conference on Human Environment held in Stockholm during June 1972 brought into focus several alarming situations and highlighted the immediate need to take steps to control menace of pollution to the Mother Earth, air and of space failing which, the Conference cautioned the mankind, it should be ready to face the disastrous consequences. The suggestions noted in this Conference were reaffirmed in successive Conference followed by Earth Summit held at Rio-de Janeiro (Brazil) in 1992. (15) Before we part with the case, we note with concern that the State and the Central Government were not very consistent in their approach about the period for which the activities can be permitted. Reasons have been highlighted to justify the somersault. Whatever be the justification, it was but imperative that due application of mind should have been made before taking a particular stand and not to change colour like a Chameleon, and that too not infrequently. This for me is one of the most philosophical judgments ever given on the issue of wildlife. It reveals the thinking of the apex court about economies versus ecology and I believe it will remain a landmark judgment in the decades to come.

Appendix V

Making a Difference: Some Supreme Court Orders Based on Recommendations of the Central Empowered Committee These are l a n d m a r k j u d g m e n t s that create a n e w p a t h for r e f o r m and r e s t r u c t u r i n g of forest institutions. A s u m of fifteen billion r u p e e s is spent each year on compensatory afforestation. Now the processes to use this money have been changed forever. Mining all across the Aravallis has been totally banned for the present in Haryana and Rajasthan. This is an earth-shaking order in the environmental interest of the nation. The eviction of one of the senior politicians in the state of Karnataka from encroached forest lands of the Chimagalur area reveals the full support the apex court gives to the protection of forests. It will set an important precedent for the future, the issue in question involves the alleged encroachment and large-scale deforestation of the Tatkola Forest in Karnataka. Let us look at some of the extracts.

420

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

LA.No. 566 of 2001 In Writ Petition (C) No. 202/1995 T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad (Petitioner) Versus Union of India and Others (Respondents). Extracts 1. We accept the Report of the Central Empowered Committee of September, 2002 Result of this is that the Report of Shri Sahay regarding encroachment in Tatkola Reserve Forest as confirmed by the Survey of India Report shall be treated as final and all encroachments reported therein shall be removed. In conclusion: (a) Shri R.M.N. Sahay, Court Commissioner's Report about the forest area under encroachment in Tatkola Reserve Forest as confirmed by Survey of India Report shall be treated as final and all encroachments reported therein shall be removed forthwith. (b) A notice shall be published in the local/vernacular newspapers at least seven days before the actual removal of encroachments is undertaken specifying to the extent feasible, the name of the encroacher, area under encroachment, the compartment number/survey number and the Forest form where the encroachments are to be removed in compliance of this order. (c) Chief Secretary, Karnataka shall be personally responsible to ensure removal of such encroachments. Director General of Police, Karnataka shall be responsible to ensure that police protection and help needed for removal of encroachments is provided as and when required. (d) The encroachers are liable to compensate for the losses caused due to the encroachments especially when the land encroached upon has been utilised for commercial purposes. We, however, take a lenient view and direct that if the encroachers voluntarily

APPENDIX

III

421

vacated the encroached land and hand over the same to the Chief Conservator of Forest within three months from today i.e. on or before 31st January, 2003, they will not be liable to pay any compensation but if they continue to remain in occupation then they will have to pay Rs 5 lakhs per hectare per month to the State Government. Money so recovered shall be kept in a separate account and shall be used exclusively for forest protection and rehabilitation of the encroached area with the concurrence of the Central Empowered Committee. (e) Action taken Report shall be filed by the Chief Secretary, Karnataka before the Central Empowered Committee every month till the encroachments are completely removed and all the compensation payable by the encroachers has been deposited. Copy of the Action Taken Report also be filed in this Court. O n Compensatory Afforestation As recommended by the Central Empowered Committee we direct as follows: (a) The Union of India shall within eight weeks today frame comprehensive rules with regard to the Constitution of a body and management of the compensatory afforestation funds in concurrence with the Central Empowered Committee. These rules shall be filed in this court within eight weeks form today. Necessary notification constituting this body will be issued simultaneously. (b) Compensatory Afforestation Funds which have not yet been realised as well as the unspent funds already realised by the States shall be transferred to the said body within six moths of its constitution by the respective states and the user-agencies. (c) In addition to above, while according transfer under Forest Conservation Act, 1980 for change in user-agency from all nonforest purposes, the user agency shall also pay into the said fund the net value of the forest land diverted for non-forest purposes. The present value is to be recovered at the rate of Rs 5.80 lakhs

450 BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

per hectare to Rs 9.20 lakhs per hectare of forest land depending upon the quantity and density of the land in question converted for non-forest use. This will be subject to upward revision by the Ministry of Environment & Forests in consultation with Central Empowered Committee as and when necessary. (d) A 'Compensatory Afforestation Fund' shall be created in which all the monies received from the user-agencies towards compensatory afforestation, additional compensatory afforestation, penal compensatory afforestation, net present value of forest land, Catchment Area Treatment Plan Funds, etc. shall be deposited. The rules, procedure and composition of the body for management of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund shall be finalised by the Ministry of Environment & Forests with the concurrence of Central Empowered Committee within one month. (e) The funds received form the user-agencies in cases where forest land diverted falls within protected Areas i.e. area notified under Section 18, 26A or 35 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, for undertaking activities related to protection of biodiversity, wildlife, etc., shall also be deposited in this Fund. Such monies shall be used exclusively for undertaking protection and conservation activities in protected areas of the respective States/ Union Territories. (f) The amount received on account of compensatory afforestation but not spent or any balance amount with the States/Union Territories or any amount that is yet to be recovered from the user-agency shall also be deposited in this fund. (g) Besides artificial regeneration (plantations), the fund shall also be utilised for undertaking assisted natural regeneration, protection of forests and other related activities. For this purpose, site specific plans should be prepared and implemented in a time bound manner. (h) The user agencies especially the large public sector undertaking such as Power Grid Corporation, N.T.PC., etc. which frequently require forest land for their projects should also be involved in

APPENDIX

III

423

undertaking compensatory afforestation by establishing Special Purpose Vehicle. Whereas the private sector used agencies may be involved in monitoring and most importantly, in protection of compensatory afforestation. Necessary procedure for this purpose would be laid down by the Ministry of Environment & Forests with the concurrence of the Central Empowered Committee, (i) Add. (j) An independent system of concurrent monitoring and evaluation shall be evolved and implemented through the Compensatory Afforestation Fund to ensure effective and proper utilisation of funds. O n Transmission Lines in Rajaji National Park Taking all circumstances into consideration, these applications are allowed, permission in granted to the Power Grid Corporation to erect the transmission lines through the Rajaji National Park. Aforesaid 14739 trees will be cut be the Forest Department of the State of Uttaranchal under the supervision of the Central Empowered Committee. Trees so cut shall be sold by the Forest Department under the supervision of the Central Empowered Committee by public auction. The amount so realised as well as the sums payable by Power Grid Corporation for afforestation etc. will be kept by the Central Empowered Committee in a fixed deposit initially for a period of three months and with the constitution of the body for the management of the Compensatory Afforestation Funds, the principal amount so realised by the Central Empowered Committee shall be transferred to the said body. This permission which is granted will be operational on Rs 50 crores being deposited with the Central Empowered Committee who shall deposit the same in fixed deposit and after twelve weeks transfer the same to the body constituted for the purpose of managing the Compensatory Afforestation Funds.

424

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Monitoring Report (First) of the Central Empowered Committee We have perused the First Monitoring Report of the Central Empowered Committee. Three suggestions have been made in the said Report .... We, accordingly, direct as follows: (1) The ban imposed with regard to the opening of the new sawmills and other wood-based industries by this Court's order dated 15th January, 1998 in the State of Nagaland is extended by a further period of five years. (2) The High Powered Committee is allowed to dispose of the assets on such defaulting units, including plants, machinery, land, shed, timber and timber products who have not paid the penalty imposed by the High Powered Committee of the wood-based units of north-eastern states. This will be subject to such orders which may be passed by the Central Empowered Committee. No State or Union Territory shall permit any unlicensed sawmills, veneer, plywood industry to operate and they are directed to close all such unlicensed unit forthwith. No State Government or Union Territory will permit the opening of any saw-mills, veneer or plywood industry without prior permission of the Central Empowered Committee. The Chief Secretary of each State will ensure strict compliance of this direction. There shall also be no relaxation of rule with regard to the grant of license without previous concurrence of the Central Empowered Committee. It shall be open to apply to this Court for relaxation and or appropriate modification or orders qua plantations or grant of licenses. Illegal Mining in Aravallis Second Monitoring Report of the Central Empowered Committee dated 28 October, 2002, has been received from the Central Empowered Committee. This Report deals with the mining which is termed as illegal

APPENDIX

III

425

in the Aravalli hills. It is stated in this Report that the members of the Central Empowered Committee visited the affected areas on 27th October, 2002, namely the forest area in the Aravalli Hills-Kote and Alampur Village. Report states that mining operations are being carried out in this area which is a forest area which was being recreated by plantations under the Aravalli Mining Programme funded by the Japanese Government in the early 90s. We, prohibit and ban all mining activity in the entire Aravalli hills. This ban is not limited only to the hills encircling Kote and Alampur villages but extends to the entire hill range of Aravalli from Dholput to Rajasthan. The Chief Secretary, State of Haryana of Chief Secretary, State of Rajasthan are directed to ensure that no mining activity in the Aravalli hills is carried out, especially, in the part which has been regarded as forest area or protected under the Environment (Protection) Act. This order was modified on 16 December 2002 permitting mining in certain areas as long as proper legal clearances were followed. The importance of our rich natural heritage has never had such priority as far as the apex court is concerned. In the same month of December 2002 the Wildlife Protection Act was amended once again being passed by both houses of Parliament. Mostly it was felt that this effort would plug most of the loopholes that plague the effective enforcement of the Act. But who knows what 2003 will bring?

: Bibliography

Aflalo, F.G.A. (1926). The Sportsman's Book for India—A Book of the Wilderness and the Jungle: London. Agarwal, Anil and Sunita Narain. (1992). Towards a Green World, New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. Agarwal Anil, et al., (eds)(1982). The First Citizens' Report on the State of the Environment in India, New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. (1999). The Fifth Citizens' Report on the State of the Environment in India, Vols. I and II, New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. Ahmad, Yusuf S. (1981). With the Wild Animals of Bengal, Dhaka: Y.S Ahmad. Alavi, M and Jahangir A Rahman (1968). The Naturalist, Delhi: National Institute of Sciences. Alfred, J.R.B. et al., (1994). The Red Data Book of Indian Animals, Part 1, Vertebrata, Calcutta: ZSI. Ali, S. (1927). 'The Mogul Emperors of India as Naturalists and Sportsmen', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 31(4), pp. 833-61. (1953). 'The Keoladeo Ghana, Bharatpur (Rajasthan)', JBNHS, Vol.51, pp. 531-6.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

427

(1935-36). 'Economics Ornithology in India', Current Science, Vol.4, pp. 472-8. (1941). The Book of Indian Birds, Bombay: Oxford University Press, Delhi: Reprint, 1979. (1953). The Birds of Kerala, Delhi: Oxford University Press, Reprint, 1984. (1987). The Fall of a Sparrow, Delhi: Oxford University Press. 'Pardhis', Hog Hunters Annual, Vol. 4 (1931) pp. 59-60. Tiger Link, Vol. 6 (1999). Alvares, Claude (1993). Fish, Curry, and Rice: A Citizen's Report on the State of the Goan Environment, Mapusa, India: The Other India Press. Alvi and Rahman, Jahangir (1968). The Naturalist, Delhi: Institute of Sciences of India. Anderson, K. (1957). Nine Man-eaters and One Rogue, Allen & Unwin. (1961). The Call of the Man-eaters, Allen & Unwin. (1962). The Tiger Roars, Allen & Unwin. (1967). This is the Jungle, Allen & Unwin. Anderson, D.M and R.H. Grove (eds) (1987). Conservation in Africa: People, Problems, Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Baikov, N.A. (1925). The Manchurian Tiger, London: Hutchinson. Baillie, W.W. (1921). Days and Nights of Shikar, London: Arnold and Co. Baker, E.B.B. (1886). Sports in Bengal, London: Ledger Smith & Co. Baker E.C.S. (1913). Indian Ducks and their Allies, Bombay: BHNS. (1994). The Gamebirds for India, Burma and Ceylon, 3 vols. Bombay, William, Pheasant Jungles, Lower Basildon, World Pheasant Association. Baker, S. (1890). Wild Beasts and Their Ways, London: Macmillan and Co. Baldwin, J.H. (1877). The Large and Small Game of Bengal and the North-western Provinces of India, Routledge.

428

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Barras, J. (1885). India and Tiger Hunting, London: Edward Llyod Ltd. Baskaran, S.T. (1999). Dance of the Sarus: Essays of a Wandering Naturalist, Delhi: Oxford University Press. Bates, R.S.P. (1984). Bird Life in India, Delhi: Daya Publishing. Baviskar, A. (1999). 'Nature at Stake', Seminar No. 466, pp. 74-9. Baxter, E.H. (1931). From Shikar and Safari London: John Murray. Baze, W. (1957). Tiger, Tiger, London: Elek Books. Beach Milo, Ebba Koch and W Thackston. (1997). The King of the World, The Padshah Namah, New York: Arthur M Seckler Library. Beatson, A.A. (1800). View of the Origin and Conduct of War with Tippoo Sultan, London: Nicol. Beebe, Williams. (1994). Pheasant Jungles, Lower Basildon: World Pheasant Association. Best, J.W. (1931). Tiger Days, London: John Murray. (1931). Indian Shikar Notes, London: John Murray. (1934). The Marked Man-eater, London: John Murray. (1935). Forest Life in India, London: John Murray. Beinart, W. (1991). 'Empire, Hunting and Ecological Changes in Southern and Central Africa', Past and Present, No. 128, pp. 16286. Bernier, F. (1934). Travels in the Mogol Empire, 1656-68, trans, and ed. A. Constable, 2nd edition, revised by V A Smith, Delhi: Oriental, Reprint, 1970. Beveridge, A. S., trans and ed., The Babur Namah, Delhi: Oriental, Reprint, 1970. Bhadran, C. P. (1934). 'The Manas Game Sanctuary, Assam', Indian Forester, Vol. 40, pp. 44-56. Bhattacharya, A. (1947). 'The Tiger Cult and its Literature in Lower Bengal', Man in India, Vol. 27, pp. 44-56. Biscoe, W.A. (1895). 'Tiger killing a Panther'. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 9 (4), pp. 490. Blandford, W.T. (1891). Fauna of British India, London: Routledge. Bonner, Nigel. (1989). Whales of the World, London: Blandford.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

429

Boomgaard, Peter. (2001). Frontiers of Fear: Tigers and People in the Malay World, 1600-1950, (Yale Agrarian Studies Series), New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Booth, M. (1987). Carpet Sahib: A life of Jim Corbett, Delhi: Oxford University Press. Boswell, K. (1957). "'Scent Trails" and "Poking" in Tigers', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 54(2), pp. 452-4. Braddon, E. (1930). Thirty Years of Shikar, London: William Blackwood & Son. Bradley, M.H. (1930). Trailing in the Tiger, London: D. Appleton & Co. Brander, A.A. Dunbar. (1923). Wild Animals in Central India, London: Edward Arnold. Breeden. Stanley and Belinda Wright, Thoughts of Tiger's Eyes: Chronicle of India's Vanishing Wildlife, USA: Ten Speed Press. Brooke, V. (1894). Big Game in India, London: H.F. and G. Witherby. Brown, J.M. (1887). Shikar Sketches: With Notes on Indian Field Sports, London: Routledge. Burke, R.G. (1935). Jungle Days, London: John Murray. Burke, W.S. (1920). The Indian Shikar Book, London: Edward Arnold. Burton, E.F. (1885). Reminiscences of Sports in India, London: J. Hale. Burton, R.G. (1928). Sports and Wildlife in the Deccan, London: Jonathan Cape. (1933). The Book of the Tiger, London: Hutchison & Co. (1936). A Book of Man-eaters, London: Hutchison & Co. (1936). The Tiger Hunters, London: Hutchison & Co. (1934), 'The tiger's method of making a kill' Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 49 (3), pp. 538-41. Bush, Mark. (1997). Ecology of a Changing Planet, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Butt, K.S.J. (1968). Shikar, London: Jaico Books. Campbell, T. (1894). 'A Tiger Eating a Bear', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 9(1), p. 101.

430

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Campbell, Major W. (1842). The Old Forest Ranger, London: Routledge. Centre for Science and Environment. (1992). The State of India's Environment 1992-93, New Delhi, CSE Publishers. Chadha, S.K. (ed). (1992). Environmental Crisis in India, Dehradun, India: International Book Distributors. Champion F.W. (1927). With Camera in Tiger Land, London: Chatto & Windus. (1933). The Jungle in Sunlight and Shadow, London: Chatto and Windus. (1934). The Preservation of Wildlife in India, No. 4, The United Provinces', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 37, pp. 104-11. (1939). 'Correspondence, The Protection of Wildlife', Indian Forester, Vol. 55, pp. 501-4. Champion, Sir H.G. and S.K. Seth. (1968). A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India, GOI Press. Chaturvedi, M.D. (1931). 'Deer Damage to Shorea Robusta, Sal Planattion', United Provinces Forest Bidletin, Vol. 7. Chellam, Ravi. (1993). 'Ecology of the Asiatic Lion, panthera leo persica', Meyer 1826. Ph.D. Thesis, Saurashtra University, Rajkot, India. Chellam, Ravi, and A.J.T. Johnsingh. (1993). 'Management of Asiatic Lions in the Gir Forests, India'. Proceedings of the Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 65, pp. 409-24. Choudhury, Anwaruddin. (1990). Checklist of the Birds of Assam, Guwahati: Sophia Press. Chundawat, R.S., W.A. Rodgers and H.S. Panwar. (1991). 'Status report on snow leopard in India'. In: Proceedings of the fifth international symposium organized by the International Snow Leopard Trust and Wildlife Institute of India (ed. by H. Freeman). Clegg, Michael et al., (eds) (1995). Science and the Endangered Species Act. Washington DC: National Academy Press. Coates, P. (1995). and Wo Beinart Environment and History: The Taming of Nature in the US and South Africa, London: Routledge.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

431

Corbett, G.B. and J.E. Hill. (1992). The Mammals of the Indo-Malayan Region: A Systematic Review, London: Oxford University Press. Corbett, J. (1892). A tiger attacking elephants Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 1(7), p. 192. (1944). Man-eaters of Kumaon, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Courtney, N. (1980). The Tiger, Symbol of Freedom, London: Quartet Books. Cronin E.W. (1979). The Arun: a Natural History of the World's Deepest Valley, Boston: Houghton Miffiin. Cubitt,Gerald and Guy, Mountfort, Wild India, London: Collins. D'Monte, Darryl. (1985). Temples or Tombs: Industry versus Environment, Three Controversies, New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. Daniels, R.J. (1997). A Field Guide to the Birds of South-western India, New Delhi: OUP. Daniel. J.C. (1983). The Book Of Indian Reptiles, Bombay: Bombay Natural History Society. (1983). A Century of Natural History. Bombay Natural History Society. (1996). A Week with Elephants, Bombay: Bombay Natural History Society. (1996). The Leopard in India—A Natural History, Dehradun: Natraj. Davidar, E.R.C. (1997). Cheetal Walk: Living in the Wilderness, Delhi:Oxford University Press. Denton Scott, J. (1959). Forests of the Night, Bombay: Jaico, Reprint 1977. Dharmakumarsinhji, R.S., Birds of Saurashtra, Bombay: privately published by the author. Dick, John Henry. (1983). A Pictorial Guide to the Birds of the Indian Subcontinent, Bombay: OUP/BNHS. Divyabhanusinh. (1996). The End of a Trail: The Cheetah in India, New Delhi: Banyan Books. (1998). 'A Princely Request', Seminar, No. 466 pp. 41-6.

432

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Dryad. (1901). 'Destruction of Game', Indian Forester, Vol. 27, pp. 549-50. Dunbar Brander, A.A. (1923). The Wild Animals of Central India, London: Edward Arnold. Eisenberg, John E, George Mckay and John Seidensticker. (1990). Asian Elephants—Studies in Sri Lanka, Washington: Smithsonian. Ellerman, J.R. and T.C.S. Morrisson-Scott. (1966). Checklist of Palaeoarctic and Indian Mammals, 1958 to 1964. 2nd edition, London: Trustess of the British Museum (Natural History). Ewans, Martin, et al. (1989). Bharatpur: Bird Paradise. London: H.F. & G. Witherby Ltd. Fayrer, J. (1878). The Destruction of Life by Wild Animals and Poisonous Snakes in India, London: The Royal Society of Arts. Fend, Werner. (1972). Die Tiger Von Abutschmar, Vienna: Verlag Fritz Molden. Flemming, Robert L. (Jr.) (1977). The Ecology, Flora and Fauna of Midland Nepal, Kathmandu, Tribhuvan University. Fletcher. F.W.F. (1911). Sport on the Nilgiris and in Wynaad, London: Macmillan. Forsyth, J. (1971). The Highlands of Central India. London: Chapman & Hall. Foster, W. (1927). Early Travels in India, 1583-1619, London: Oxford University Press. Fox, Michael, and A.J.T. Johnsingh. (1974). 'Hunting and Feeding in Wild Dogs', Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 321-6. Futehally, Zafar. (1967). 'Misuse of Nature: Some Ecological Facts', The Times of India, 11 June. Gadgil, Madhav and Ramchandra Guha. (1992). This fissured Land: An Ecological History of India, New Delhi: Oxford University Press. (1989). 'State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India', Past and Present, Vol. 123, pp. 141-77. (1995). Ecology and Equity: The Use and Abuse of Nature in Contemporary India, New Delhi: Penguin Books.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

433

Gadgil, M. and R. Thapar. (1990). 'Human Ecology in India—Some Ecological Perspectives', Interdisciplinary Review, Vol. 15, pp. 209-23. Gadgil, M. and V.D. Vartak. (1973). 'Groves Dedicated to the Gods', Illustrated Weekly of India, 2 September, pp. 20-1. Gamekeeper. (1887). 'Destruction of Game in Government Reserves during the Rains', Indian Forester, Vol. 13, pp. 188-9. Ganguli, Usha. (1975). A Guide to the Birds of the Delhi Area, New Delhi: Indian Council for Agricultural Research. Gee, E.P. (1964). The Wildlife of India, London: Collins. (1961). 'History of Rhino Area in Nepal', Cheetal, Vol. 2, pp. 16-28. (1954). 'The Management of India's National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries, Part II', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 52, pp. 453-86. (1968). The Management of India's National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries, Part V, Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 65, pp. 717-31. Ghorpade, M.Y. (1983). Sunlight and Shadows, London: Gollanez. Gorrie, M. (1980). 'Holy Groves', Indian Forester, Vol. 62, pp. 150-1. Green, M.J.B. (1990). International Union for the Conservation of Nature Directory of South Asian Protected Areas, Cambridge: IUCN. Grove, Richard. (1995). Green Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens and the Origins of Enviornmentalism, 16001860. New York: Cambridge University Press. Grove, Richard, Vinita Damodaran, and Satpal Sangwan (eds). Nature and the Orient: Environmental History of South and Southeast Asia. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Guggisberg, C.A. (1977). Early Wildlife Photographers, London: David and Charles. Guha, R. (1989). The Uncjuiet Woods: The Ecological Bases of Peasant Resistance in the Himalaya, Delhi: Oxford University Press, Revised Edition, 1999.

434

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Gurung, K.K. (1983). Heart of the Jungle: The Wildlife of Chitwan, Nepal, London: Andre Deutsch. (1996). Mammals of Indian Subcontinent and Where to Watch Them, Oxford: Indian Experience. Habib, I. (1990). An Atlas of the Mughal Empire, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hanley, P. (1961). Tiger Trails in Assam, London: Robert Hale. Hardy, Sarah B. (1977). The Langurs of Abu, Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press. Hewett J. (1938). Jungle Trails in Northern India, London: Methuen. High Court of Delhi. (1996). Recommendations of the Committee appointed by the High Court of Delhi on wildlife protection, preservation and the law, Delhi. Hillard, Darla. (1989). Vanishing Tracks—Four Years Among the Snow Leopards of Nepal, London: Elm Tree. Hooker, J.D. (1855). Himalayan Journals, 2 vols., London: John Murray. Insight Guide to Indian Wildlife, (1992), Singapore: Apa Publications. Insight Guide to Sri Lanka, (1995), Singapore: Apa Publications. Imam, S.H.A.A. (1979). Brown Hunter, Delhi: Allied Publishers. Indian Board for Wildlife (1970), Report of the Expert Committee, New Delhi: IBWL, September. Inskipp, Carol. (1998). A Birdwatchers' Guide to Nepal, Huntington: Prion. International Council for Bird Preservation. (1989). Nepal's Forest Birds, Their Status and Conservation, Cambridge. (1989). The Birds and Mammals of the Annapurna Conservation Area, Katmandu: Annapurna Conservation Area Project. Israel, S. and Sinclair, Toby. (1987). Indian Wildlife, Singapore: Apa Publications. Ives, Richard. (1995). Of Tigers and Men, New York: Doubleday. Jackson, P. (1997). Tigers, Apple Press. Jackson, R.M. and D. Hillard. (1986). 'Tracking the Elusive Snow Leopard' National Geographic, 169, pp. 792-809. Jerdon, T.C. (1991). The Birds of India, 3 vols., 1862-64.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

435

Jeffries, Margaret. (1986). Sagarmatha, The Story of Mount Everest, Auckland: Hope Press. (1991). Royal Chitwan National Park: Wild Heritage of Nepal, Seattle: The Mountaineers. Joslin, P. (1973). The Asiatic Lion: A Study of Ecology and Behaviour, Ph.D. Thesis. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, pp. 249. Kala, D.C. (1979). A Life of Jim Corbett, Revised ed. Delhi: Ravi Dayal Publisher, 1999. Karanth, K. Ullas, (2002). The Way of the Tiger: Natural History and Conservation of the Endangered Big Cat, Bangalore: Centre for Wildlife Studies. Karanth, K. Ullas and James D. Nichols, (eds) Monitoring Tigers and their Prey: A Manual for Researchers, Managers and Conservationists in Tropical Asia, Bangalore: Centre for Wildlife Studies. Karisson, B.G. (1998). 'Eco-development in Practice: The Buxa Tiger Reserve and Forest People', Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 34, pp. 2087-92. Khan, M.A.R. (1985). Mammals of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Nazima Reza. Koch, Ebba, and Dara Shukoh, (1997). Shooting Nilgais: Hunt and Landscape in Mughal Painting, Smithsonian Occasional Paper, no. 1, Washington: Smithsonian. Kothari, A., N. Singh and S. Suri. (1996). 'Conservation in India: A New Direction', Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, pp. 2755-76. Krishan M. (1985). Nights and Days, New Delhi: Vikas. (1938). 'Flying Foxes', The Hindu, Madras, 7 August. (1956). 'The Vanishing Cheetah', The Statesman, Calcutta, 22 July. (1957). 'A Lament for Lost Wood', The Statesman, Calcutta, 21 July. (1958). "The Sloth Bear' The Statesman, Calcutta, 28 September. (1968). 'The Tiger: A Domiciled Alien in India', The Statesman, Calcutta, 4 March.

436

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

(1961). Jungle and Backyard, Delhi: National Book Trust. (1985). Nights and Days: My Book of Indian Wildlife, Delhi: Vikas. (1975). India's Wildlife in 1959-70, Bombay: Bombay Natural History Society. Lahiri Choudhury, D.K. (1999), (ed.), The Great Indian Elephant Book: An Anthology of Writings on Elephants in the Raj, Delhi: Oxford University Press. Lai, M a k h a n . (1986). 'Iron Tools, Forest Clearance and Urbanization in the Gangetic Plains', Man and Environment, Vol. 10, pp. 83-90. Lall, J.S. (1995). (ed). The Himalayas: Aspects of Change. A Selection, Oxford University Press. Lele, S. (1995). 'Environmental Governance', Seminar, No.438, pp. 17-23. Lewis, Michael. (2003). Inventing Global Ecology: Tracking the Biodiversity Ideal in India 1945-1997, New Delhi: Orient Longman Private Limited. Leyhausen, P., C. Holloway and M.K. Ranjitsinh. (1976). Conservation of the Tiger in India—A Report to the Chairman of the Project Tiger Steering Committee on a Mid-term Study of Project Tiger, Delhi: WWF-IUCN. Littledale, H. (1889). 'Bears being eaten u p by tigers', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 4 (4), p. 316. Locke, A. (1954). The Tigers ofTrengganu, London: Museum Press. Mackenzie, John. (1988). The Empire ofNature: Hunting, Conservation and the British Imperialism. New York: Manchester University Press. Madhusudan, M.D. and K. Ullas Karanth. (1998). 'Bringing Home the Bacon: Local Hunting and Large Mammal Conservation in India', Paper presented at the National Seminar on Wildlife Conservation, Research and Management, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, August 10-13. Maharaja of Cooch Behar. (1985). Big Game Shooting in Eastern and Northern India, Delhi: Mittal Publications.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

437

Manfredi, P. (1997). (ed.), In Danger: Habitats, Species, Peoples, Delhi: Ranthambhore Foundation. McDougal, C. (1977). The Face of the Tiger, London: Rivington Books. McNeely, Jeffrey and David Pitt. (1985). (eds) Culture and Conservation: The Human Dimension in Environmental Planning. Dover, New Hampshire: Croom Helm (for International Union for the Conservation of Nature). Menon, V. (1996). Under Siege: Poaching and Protection of the Greater One-horned Rhinoceros in India, Delhi: Traffic India. Milroy, A.J.W. (1934). 'Game Preservation in India-Assam', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 37, pp. 97-105. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. (1993). A Review of Project Tiger, Delhi. Montgomery, Sy. (1995). Spell of the Tiger, Boston: Houghton Miffiin. Morris, R. (1927). 'A tigress with five cubs', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 31(3), pp. 810-11. Mountfort, G. (1978). Back from the Brink, London: Hutchinson. (1973). Tigers, London: David & Charles. (1981). Saving the Tiger, London: Michael Joseph. Mukherjee, Ajit. (1966). Extinct and Vanishing Birds and Mammals, Calcutta: Indian Museum. Mundy, G.C. (1858). 'Pen and Pencil Sketches in India', London: John Murray, pp. 201-2. Musselwhite, A. (1933). Behind the Lens in Tigerland, London. Myers, Norman. (1979). The Sinking Ark: A New Look at the Problem of Disappearing Species, New York: Pergamon Press. Niyogi, Tushar K. (1996). Tiger Cult of the Sundarbans, Calcutta: Anthropological Survey of India. Oliver, William. (1980). The Pigmy Hog, Jersey: Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust. P a n w a r , H.S. (1991). Kanha National Park—A Handbook, Ahmadabad: CEE.

438

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Parashar Sen, Aloka. (1998). 'Of Hunters, Tribes and Barbarians', Studies in History, Vol. 14, pp. 173-92. Perry, Richard. (1964). The World of the Tiger, London: Cassell. Prater, S. (1988). The Book of Indian Animals, Bombay: BNHS. Rangarajan, M. (1996). Fencing the Forest: Conservation and Ecological Change in India's Central Provinces, 1860-1914, Delhi: Oxford University Press. (1998). 'From Princely Symbol to Conservation Icon: A Political History of the Lion in India', Occasional Paper No. 54, Delhi: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. (1998). 'The Raj and the Natural World: The War against "Dangerous Beasts" in Colonial India', Studies in History, Vol. I. 14, pp. 265-300. (1999). 'Troubled Legacy: A Brief History of Wildlife Preservation in India', Occasional Paper No. 44, Delhi: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. _ _ _ (ed.). (1999). The Oxford Anthology of Indian Wildlife, Volume I, Hunting and Shooting, Delhi: Oxford University Press. (ed.). (1999). The Oxford Anthology of Indian Wildlife, Volume II, Watching and Conserving, Delhi: Oxford University Press. Ranjit Singh, M.K. (1990). The Indian Blackbuck, Dehra Dun: Natraj. (1997). Beyond the Tiger: Portraits of South Asian Wildlife, New Delhi: Brijbasi. Rathore, Fateh Singh, (1996). 'Gujarat a n d Rajasthan', in Recommendations of the Committee appointed by the High Court of Delhi on wildlife protection, preservation and the law, Delhi, pp. 152-3. Rice, William. (1857). Tiger Shooting in India. London: Vintage Books. Richardson, W. (1890). 'Tiger Cubs', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 5(2); p. 191. Ripley, S. Dillon, (1952). Search for the Spiny Babbler, Boston: Houghton Miffiin. (1961). A Synopsis of the Birds of India and Pakistan, Bombay: (BNHS revised 1982).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

439

Roberts, T.J. (1977). The Mammals of Pakistan, London: Benn. Rodgers, W. A., H. S. Panwar and V. B. Mathur, (2000). Wildlife Protected Area Network in India: A Review, Dehra Dun: Wildlife Institute of India. Rogers, A. and H. Beveridge, (1909). The Tuzuk I Jahangiri, London: Royal Asiatic Society. Roonwul, M.L. and S.M. Mohnot, (1977). The Primates of South Asia, Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press. Roonwal, M.L., S.M. Mohnot, and N.S. Rathore (eds). (1984). Current Primate Researches. Jodhpur: Dept. of Zoology, Jodhpur University. Russell, C.E.M. (1900). Bullet and Shot in Indian Forest, Plain and Hill, London: W. Thacker. Saberwal, V., J. Gibbs, R. Chellam a n d A.J.T. Johnsingh. (1994).'Lion-human Conflict in the Gir Forest, I n d i a ' , Conservation Biology, Vol. 8, pp. 501-7. Saberwal, V., Mahesh Rangarajan and Ashish Kothari. (2001). People, Parks and Wildlife: Towards Coexistence. London: Sangam Books Limited. Saharia, V.B. (1982). Wildlife in India, Delhi: Natraj. Sanderson, G.P. (1982). Thirteen Years among the Wild Beast in India, London: W.H. Allen & Co. Sankhala, K. (1978). Tiger, London: Collins. Sarkar, J. (1969). 'A Description of Bengal in AD 1609', Bengal Past and Present, Vol. 35, pp. 1-7. Schaller, G.B. (1967). The Deer and the Tiger, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (1977). Mountain Monarchs; Wild Sheep and Goats of the Himalaya, Chicago: Chicago University Press. (1980). Stones of Silence; journeys in the Himalaya, London: Andre Deutsch. Scott, Jonathan. (1985). The Leopard's Tale London: Elm Tree Book. Seidensticker, J., S. Christie and P. Jackson, (1999). (eds), Riding the Tiger: Tiger Conservation in Human-dominated Landscapes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

440

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Server, Lee, (1991). Tigers, New York: Todtri. Seshadhri, B. (1969). The Twilight of India's Wildlife, London: John Baker. Shah, Anup and Manoj. (1996). A Tiger's Tale, London: Fountain Press. Shahi, S.P. (1977). Backs to the Wall: Saga of Wildlife in Bihar—India, Delhi: Affiliated East-West Press. Sharma, B.D. (1994). High Altitude Wildlife in India, New Delhi: Oxford and India Book House. Shastri, M.M. (1910). The Syainikasastra ofRudra Deva of Kumaon, (trans, and ed. Haraprasad, 1982), Delhi: Reprint Publishers. (1986). India's Wildlife and Reserves, New Delhi: Sterling. (1994). 'Consserve Biodiversity', Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 29, pp. 2108-17. Shiva, Vandana. (1993). Monocultures of the Mind: Perspectives on Biodiversity and Biotechnology. Dehradun: Natraj Publishers. Singh, A. (1973). Tiger Haven, London: Macmillan. (1981). Tara, A Tigress, London: Quartet. (1984). Tiger, London: Jonathan Cape. Singh, K. (1959). The Tiger of Rajasthan, London: Robert Hale Ltd. (1965). Hints on Tiger Shooting, Delhi: The Hindustan Times Ltd. Singh, Sadul (of Bikaner). (1925). '3 cheetahs shot dead', entry for 11 April in 'Big Game Diary' (personal diary). Stebbing, E.P. (1920). Jungle By-Ways in India, London: John Lane Co. Stracey, P.D. (1968). Tigers, London: Barker. S u k u m a r , Raman. (1989). The Asian Elephant: Ecology and Management. Cambridge Studies in Applied Ecology and Resource M a n a g e m e n t Series, N e w York: C a m b r i d g e University Press. (1994). Elephant Days and Nights, New Delhi: OUP. Sunquist, Fiona and Mel. (1988). Tiger Moon, Chicago: University Of Chicago Press. Tigress, London, Quartet Books, 1981;

BIBLIOGRAPHY

441

The Legend of the Man Eater; New Delhi, Ravidayal,1993; Tiger Tiger, London, Jonathan Cape, 1984 Thapar, Valmik. (2002). Cult of the Tiger. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. (ed.). (2001). Saving Wild Tigers, New Delhi, Permanent Black. (2001). Bridge of God—20 Days in the Masai Mara. New Delhi: Valmik Thapar. (2000). Wild Tigers of Ranthambhore. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. (1999). Tiger, Sussex: Wayland Press. (1999). The Secret Life of Tigers. New Delhi: Oxford University Press (a new reprint of Tigers, the Secret Life). (1997). Land of the Tiger. London: BBC Books. (1992). The Tiger's Destiny. London: Kyle Cathie. (1989). The Secret Life. London: Hamish Hamilton. (1986). Tiger—Portrait of a Predator. London: Collins. (1982). With Tigers in the Wild. New Delhi: Vikas. Thapar, Valmik, Jim Corbett, Billy Arjan Singh and G. Ward. (2002). Tigers and Tigerwallahs, New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Tikader, B.K. (1993). Threatened Animals of India, Calcutta: ZSI. Tilson, R.L. and Seal, V. (1987). Tigers of the World: The biology, bio politics, management and conservation ofan endangered species, New Jersey: Noyes Publications. Toogood, C. (1936). 'Number of cubs in a Tigress' litter', Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 39 (1), p. 158. Toovey, J. (1987). Tigers of the Raj, London: Alan Sutton. (1995). The Handbook of Wetland Management, compiled by B.Gopal, New Delhi: WWF-India. (1992). The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, 2nd edition (as amended up to 1991), Dehra Dun: Natraj. Tyabji, H a s h i m , (1994). Bandhavgarh National Park, N e w Delhi. Ward, Geoffrey C. (1993). Tiger Wallahs, New York: Harper Collins.

442

BATTLING FOR SURVIVAL

Whitaker, R. (1974). Gharial Survey Report, Madras: Madras Snake Park Trust. Wildlife Preservation Society of India. (1995). Tiger Poaching Statistics of India, Delhi: Wildlife Preservation Society of India, December. Zebrowski, M. (1983). Deccani Paintings, Delhi: Roli Books International. Zimmerman, F. (1987). The Jungle and the Aroma of Meats: An Ecological Theme in Hindu Medicine, Berkeley: University of California Press. Zwaenepoel, Jean-Pierre, (1992). Tigers, San Francisco: Chronicle Books.

Name Index

Abdulali, Humayun 175 Abdullah, Farooq 295 Agarwal, Anil 306 Ahmed, F.A. 249 Ali, Salim 121 Arthur, George 4

Dillon Ripley, S. 239 Dodsworth, P.T.L. 41 Dorai Rajan, D. 149

Bahuguna, Sundar Lai 282 Bernhard 293 Berwick, S. 239 Bhutto, Z A . 251 Brander, A A . Dunbar 82 Burton, R.G. 123 Burton, R.W. 124

Farish 5 Forsyth, J.

Cadell, Patrick 105 Champion, F.W. 96 Chaturvedi, M.D. 169 Chinnappa, K.M. 324 Chundawat, R.S. 370 Corbett, J. 136 Desai, Morarji 2 75 Dharmakumarsinhji, K.S. 198

Eardley-Wilmot, Santhill Elliot, J.G. 5

9

Gandhi, Indira 263 Gandhi, M.K. 169 Gandhi, Maneka 349 Gandhi, Rajiv 305 Gandhi, Sanjay 280 Gandhi, Sonia 349 Gee, E.P. 275 Gerrard, M. 31 Ghorpade, Y.R. 191 Gibson, Alexander 4 Gilbert, Reginald 35 Gowda, Deve 351 Gujral, I.K. 351

53

444

N A M E INDEX

Hardy, Sarah

Rathore, Fateh Singh 320 Richmond, R.D. 108 Russell, C.E.M. 27

2 39

Jackson, Peter 311 Jafry, Hasan Abid 136 Jepson, Stanley 134 Joslin, P. 239 Karanth, Ullas 325 Khan, M.A. 210 Kipling, J.L. 19 Krishnan, M. 208 Littledale, H.

23

Millard, W.S. 39 Milroy, A.J.W. 92 Mitchell, P. Chalmers Monteath, G. 242 Morris, R.C. 112 Nath, Kamal 319 Nehru, Jawaharlal Nightingale 121 Noltie, H.J. 5

63

227

Padmanabh Pillai, E.V. 141 Pande, Kedar 249 Phipson, H.M. 17 Phythian-Adams, E.G. 70 Prater, S.H. 89 Rainey, John Rudd 12 Rajamani, R. 325 Ram, Jagjivan 263 Rangarajan, Mahesh 67 Rao, Narsimha 274

Sanderson, G.P. 9 Sankhala, Kailash 245 Satarawala, K.T. 301 Schaller, George 233 Scindia, Madhavrao 301 Seshadri, B. 241 Shahi, S.P. 247 Shukla, V.C. 214 Shuttleworth, A.T. 17 Singh, Billy Arjan 258 Singh, G. 234 Singh, J. A. 175 Singh, Jaswant 352 Singh, Karan 247 Singh, Sadul 107 Spillet, Juan 237 Stebbing, E.P. 57 Sterndale, Robert A. 9 Stracey, P.D. 175 Tiwari, N.D.

284

Vajpayee, A.B. 349 Vidal, G.W. 24 Ward, Geoffrey C. Watson 3 Wavell 141 Williamson, T. 1 Yule, George

31

320

' A tigress stands over her massive crocodile kill. It was such encounters in the wilderness that reflected the richness of India's natural world. This in my opinion is one of the few unique pictures ever taken of the two powerful predators that walk planet earth.' -Valmik Thapar

OXFORD U N I V E R S I T Y PRESS

www.oup.com