(IN): Big Cat Is Fair Game

[Guest guest]

Link:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Editorial/COMMENT-Big-Cat-Is-Fair-Game/articl\

eshow/4293225.cms

 

 

<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/>

 

Big Cat Is Fair Game 21 Mar 2009, 0005 hrs IST, Jay Mazoomdaar

 

 

In this age of notoriously short public memory, it is good news for

conservation that the tiger issue is still alive in the media. But even

after so much media outcry for so long, the tiger still makes only sad

headlines. Why only the media, some of the country's mightiest institutions

Parliament, Supreme Court, the Prime Minister's Office and CBI have devoted

unusual attention to the tiger since the 2005 Sariska expose. But too many

big cats officially 39 in the last three years are still getting killed.

 

So, why is our conservation story still a mess despite all the attention and

resources? Maybe most of us who are supposed to fix it don't know how.

Consider how we handle so-called maneaters. Be it Tadoba, Sunderbans or

Corbett, the administrative response to conflict is usually ad hoc and much

of the media coverage just provocative. In most cases after an attack, the

media and the local officials hastily label the tiger a maneater, make

people panic and together hound the top authorities who, in turn, save their

skin by issuing orders to capture or kill the " beast " .

 

The danger and excitement associated with maneaters can make many jump the

gun (or pen). But how can we expect even the more sensible forest officers

and reporters to act responsibly if they have no knowledge of tiger

behaviour? Ironically, it does not take too much to be reasonably sure about

the nature of an animal attack.

 

I was in Corbett in June 2005 when an attempt was made to dub a tigress a

maneater after an attack on a mess worker in the Dhikala complex. It made

for a fascinating story. The tigress with her four semi-adult cubs used to

come looking for scavenging animals near a garbage dump where Dhikala mess

workers disposed of kitchen leftovers. One night, a mess worker returned to

his quarter late. As he bent over to unlock his hutment door, a tiger

pounced on him. His screams made his colleagues rush to the spot and the

tiger scampered, leaving the man badly injured.

 

This triggered a rumour of a maneater tigress roaming free around Dhikala.

The tourist rush to the lodging complex reached an all-time high. A curfew

would be imposed daily at seven in the evening and forest patrol parties

guarded the complex through the night. During the investigation, it became

clear that the tigress was not to blame. One of her cubs had mistaken the

mess worker for prey. The tiger could not break the victim's neck,

indicating that the animal was one of the inexperienced cubs. The Corbett

authorities did not buckle under pressure and no attempt was made to capture

or kill the tigress. No subsequent attack was reported.

 

In contrast, the tiger that recently attacked a woman in Corbett was

promptly tracked down and packed off to a zoo. But for a central

intervention that irked a number of Uttarakhand officials, it would have

been shot dead. Similarly, in defiance of biological indicators, the Uttar

Pradesh forest department's response to five so-called maneaters was

determined by assumptions, media hype and public pressure. When the Centre

forced the state to revoke arbitrary shoot-at-sight orders, it triggered a

turf war. Not long ago in Tadoba, officials shot down a wrong tiger a robust

male to placate angry villagers demanding elimination of a tigress accused

of serial attacks. Bandhavgarh also lost a couple of so-called maneaters to

zoos, no questions asked.

 

Mindless killing or trapping of big cats has become almost a seasonal

routine in Sunderbans where simple steps like effective crowd management

could avoid many human injuries and allow safe passage to most tigers caught

in the middle of people. Many consider it a major triumph for conservation

if they can avoid shooting down a so-called maneater and instead rescue it

to a zoo.

 

A zoo tiger may sound better than a dead tiger, but in terms of ecological

loss, both amount to one tiger less in the wild. The same misconception

prompts opinion-makers to argue that the tiger will survive extinction only

if people have economic incentive to farm the animal. Conservation is not

about raising a million tigers in ranches but about letting a few thousands

be in the wild, where at the top of the food chain they protect the ecology

of forests that, in turn, ensure our water security.

 

But why blame amateurs when many of our forest bosses are not scientific

managers but merely bureaucrats? The latest flashpoint between the Rajasthan

forest department and the Centre involved the relocation of a third tiger

from Ranthambhore to Sariska. The Centre had instructed the state to pick up

one of the floaters, young tigers still looking to establish territories.

Shifting a resident tiger upsets not only the uprooted animal but also the

rest of the resident population. But the state bosses chafed since getting

hold of a suitable floater required rigorous tracking. Soon, the media was

quoting unnamed sources to blame the Centre for delaying the relocation

process.

 

The fault, indeed, lies in the fundamentals. No amount of political will or

funds can turn the tide in the absence of a professional, informed

management. A little homework will harm no one, and certainly not the media.

 

 

The writer is a Delhi-based journalist and film-maker.

 

 

 

--

http://www.stopelephantpolo.com

http://www.freewebs.com/azamsiddiqui