A Look At Project Tiger, 50 Years On

Relevance: GS3 - Conservation

(Source: The Hindu, 01/10/2024)

Click here for Daily Current Affairs

Why in the news?

• This article discusses Project Tiger and the steps taken by the government for the conservation of tigers in India as well as the various challenges faced in its implementation.
• At present, India has 54 Tiger Reserves in 18 States occupying 78,135.956 sq. km, or 2.38% of India’s total land area.

What is Project Tiger?

• Project Tiger is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme of the Government of India that was launched in 1973 under the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act (WLPA), 1972.
• It introduced Tiger Reserves to help implement and promote the in-situ conservation of tigers in the country.
• Project Tiger aims to provide central assistance to the tiger states for tiger conservation in designated tiger reserves.
• It focuses on the conservation of the big cats while also ensuring the preservation of their natural habitat and other areas of ecological significance that are crucial for wildlife conservation.

Progress made under Project Tiger

• Tiger reserves in India: The number of tiger reserves increased from nine covering over 9,115 sq. km to 54 (covering 78,135.956 sq km in 18 states).
• Critical Tiger Habitats (CTH): CTH covers 42,913.37 sq. km or 26% of the area under National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
• Tiger population: As of 2022, there were 3,167-3,925 tigers in India (camera-trap method) while the first tiger census in 1972 recorded 1,827 tigers (pug-mark method).
  • According to estimates, India’s tiger population, home to three-quarters of the world’s tigers, is growing at 6.1% per annum.

What were the steps taken by the government to improve the functioning of Project Tiger?

Critical Tiger Habitats

• Critical Tiger Habitats’ were created by the government to reserve and protect a part of India’s forests for tiger-centric activities.
• It adopted a fortress conservation approach towards tiger protection with a Buffer Area - a mix of forest and non-forest land - beyond each CTH.
• Despite the people-oriented and inclusive approach, it led to conflict as it displaced people who had coexisted with tigers for generations.

Tiger Task Force

• In 2005, the government of India established a five-member ‘Tiger Task Force’ following public outcry over deficiencies in the conservation of tigers.
• According to allegations, tigers existed only on paper in Sariska despite the government spending ₹2 crores for upkeep and safety per tiger versus ₹24 lakh per tiger in other areas.
• Findings:
  • The approach towards conservation that involved the use of guns, guards, and fences was not appropriate for protecting tigers.
  • There was an increase in the conflict between forest bureaucracy and the traditional dwellers
  • The protection of the tiger was inseparable from the protection of the forests, which in turn was inseparable from the lives of the inhabitants of these areas.

Amendment of WLPA

• In 2006, Parliament amended WLPA in September 2006 to establish the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) and a tiger conservation plan.
• Although it protected the CTH, it modified the use of the forest by forest dwellers and permitted their relocation if necessary.
• It did not prohibit the diversion of a “tiger’s forest” for development projects and allowed wildlife to be killed as a last resort.

Forest Rights Act

• The government also enacted the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 (FRA).
• The FRA recognized all customary and traditional forest rights on all forest land (individual and community).
  • It gave the Gram Sabhas the authority to protect, conserve, and manage forests, wildlife, and biodiversity within customary and traditional boundaries.
  • It permitted the Gram Sabha to democratically determine and demarcate forest rights vested in them by the FRA.
  • It led to securing the livelihoods of at least 20 crore Indians in 1.79 lakh villages, with half of them being tribals.
  • It also introduced the concept of ‘Critical Wildlife Habitat’ ( similar to the CTH) which could not be diverted for non-forestry purposes.

Challenges in implementing CTHs

• As of 2018, there were 2,808 villages in CTHs housing 57,386 families (as of 2019) of which 42,398 remained inside 50 Tiger Reserves.
• Originally, Tiger Reserves were to be created in a non-arbitrary democratic process based on scientific and objective criteria.
  • Basis: Scientific evidence of the irreversible damage to wildlife that human activities wreak
• Tiger conservation was also required to ensure the agricultural, livelihood, development, and other interests of the people living in tiger-bearing forests or a tiger reserve.
• In 2007, the government in a rushed decision notified 26 Tiger Reserves in 12 States without complying with WLPA provisions.
  • 91.77% of this area encompassed CTHs while the CTHs except for Similipal had no Buffer Area.
  • They were added in 2012 after the Supreme Court rapped the NTCA and set a three-month deadline.
• However, the government has a responsibility to assess whether the coexistence of forest dwellers and tigers is possible, and if necessary relocate the forest dwellers to establish a CTH.
  • The Buffer Area was developed to promote human-animal coexistence while recognizing the livelihood, developmental, social, and cultural rights of locals.
• Tiger Reserves in India have been notified without meeting these requirements and obtaining informed consent from forest dwellers.
• As a result of this, tigers have been forced to inhabit a landscape that suffered from illegalities.

Relocation and rehabilitation

• WLPA prohibits all relocation except voluntary relocation on mutually agreed terms and conditions.
  • Once FRA recognizes people’s rights, the State acquires those rights as per the terms of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act 2013.
  • LARR also requires the rehabilitation package to provide financial compensation as well as secure livelihoods to those relocated.
• It entitles forest dwellers to a wide range of benefits such as access to socio-economic benefits but they have been limited to just a compensation package which was not a suitable compensation.
• Some people have claimed that consent has been obtained through coercion.

Tiger conservation versus rights of forest dwellers

• Resistance of rights: In 2017, the NTCA barred the recognition of rights under FRA in the CTHs due to the absence of appropriate guidelines.
  • Both WLPA and FRA require forest-dwellers rights to be recognized even inside CTHs.
  • The ban was withdrawn once the guidelines were issued by the Union government.
• Environmental clearances: The FRA provides for the establishment of 13 basic government public utilities which may require tree felling on a large scale.
  • Although, such diversion of land required the consent of the Gram Sabha, the Union Environment Ministry insisted in 2020 that the National Board for Wildlife issue a wildlife clearance if these diversions are from National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
  • As per law, wildlife clearance is required only for projects that require environmental clearance under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, but these public utilities do not fall under the listed infrastructure.

Conclusion

• India’s journey with Project Tiger highlights the need to balance tiger conservation with the rights and livelihoods of traditional inhabitants and the possibilities of increasing human-wildlife conflict. Therefore, laws and policies must dynamically evolve to reflect ecological, social, and legal complexities.

*To learn more about the achievements of NTCA, click the link.

(*Click this link to read prelims specific weekly current affairs articles)

FAQs

MCQs

Question: The term M-STRIPES' is sometimes seen in the news in the context of (UPSC 2017)

(a) Captive breeding of Wild Fauna

(b) Maintenance of Tiger Reserves

(c) Indigenous Satellite Navigation System

(d) Security of National Highways

Question: Consider the following statements: [2014]

1. Animal Welfare Board of India was established under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
2. The National Tiger Conservation Authority is a statutory body.
3. The National Ganga River Basin Authority is chaired by the Prime Minister.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 and 3 only

(c) 2 only

(d) 1, 2 and 3

Question: Among the following Tiger Reserves, which one has the largest area under “Critical Tiger Habitat” [2020]

(a) Corbett

(b) Ranthambore

(c) Nagarjunsagar-Srisailam

(d) Sunderbans.

Question: Consider the following protected areas [2012]

1. Bandipur
2. Bhitarkanika
3. Manas
4. Sunderbans

Which of the above are declared Tiger Reserves?

(a) 1 and 2 only

(b) 1, 3 and 4 only

(c) 2, 3, and 4 only

(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4