Interview of Dr M K Ranjitsinh(Global 500 Roll of Honour of the United Nations Environment Programme(UNEP) winner

[Guest guest]

*Dear all,*

* Please find attached an interview of Dr M K Ranjitsinh, one

of South Asia's most prominent wildlife conservationists. This interview was

conducted by me for the Wildlife Trust of India early this year for their

website but since that has not come to fruition I am posting it here with Dr

Ranjitsinh's permission. He is one person I miss the most from WTI and he

sent me a very moving note when I left. We are still in touch and I have the

highest regard for his achievements and the kindness with which he has

always treated me. Please feel free to circulate with proper credits.*

* Warm regards and best wishes,*

**

* *

*Profile of Dr M K Ranjitsinh, Chairman of the Wildlife Trust of India

 

It is perhaps sacrilegious to squeeze all the achievements of the Wildlife

Trust of India Chairman, Dr M K Ranjitsinh in one short profile note. A

scion of the former royal family of Wankaner in Saurashtra, Gujarat, he is

one of the most distinguished and accomplished wildlifers in India and

indeed the world. Named after the famous cricketer, Dr Ranjitsinh has led a

peripatetic and multifarious life that has seen him make full use of his

multi talented personality. As Collector of Dhar and Mandhla districts from

1965 to 1970 he handled one of the severest famines in recent times, with

almost one and a half lakh labourers working on the scarcity works and

foodgrain provision being a major task. He was Deputy Secretary and, Forests and Wildlife, in the Ministry of Agriculture and in this

role took substantive roles in administrative aspects of wildlife

conservation of the forests of Andaman and Nicobars, Arunachal Pradesh and

Goa. Dr Ranjitsinh has been instrumental in setting up one of the most

remarkable zoological gradens in the country, Van Vihar in Bhopal, perhaps

the only zoo in the world with an open air enclosure for leopards. As

Commissioner of Bhopal from 1983 to 1985 he directed relief operations

during the disastrous gas leak in December 1984. He has also served as General of the Council for the Advancement of People's Action and

Rural Technology(CAPART) and was involved in sanctioning of projects of

prominent non governmental agencies. Dr Ranjitsinh drafted and piloted the

Wildlife(Preservation) Act of 1972, the first comprehensive wildlife

legislation applicable to the whole country. As the first Director of

Wildlife Preservation of India under this Act from 1973 to 1975, he drafted

the schemes for financial assistance to different Indian states for

establishing national parks and sanctuaries. He has spearheaded the

protection of the Central Indian race of the Barasingha, the Manipur Brow

antlered Deer and the Nilgiri Tahr, amongst numerous other species. As the

Member Secretary of the Task Force for formulating Project Tiger, he was

instrumental in the identification of the first tiger reserves in India. Dr

Ranjitsinh prefers to see animals in the wild, but he was responsible for

the launching of the successful captive breeding and rehabilitation of three

species of crocodilians in India. From 1975 to 1980, he worked as the

Regional Adviser in Nature Conservation in the Bangkok regional Office of

the United Nations Environmental Programme(UNEP) and rendered technical

advice in nature conservation, ecosystem management, legislation and

international cooperation in this regard to Asian countries. Thailand's

national conservation plan was prepared with his assistance. His exemplary

efforts in nature conservation saw him as the only representative on the

Expert Group that assisted the Government of Germany in preparation of the

International Conservation of Migratory species of Wildlife. Dr Ranjitsinh

played a leading role in the amendment of the Wildlife(Protection) Act of

1972 and banned the trade of endangered species all over the country. He

loves tigers but he loves their elusive mountain dwelling brethren, the Snow

Leopard too and initiated a project for the conservation of this species.

India's premier wildlife research institute, the Wildlife Institute of India

was started with his support and he acted as Chairman of its Research

Advisory Committee. He has been the Chairman of the Standing Committee of

the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species(CITES) and has

led the Indian delegation to the World National Parks Congress in the United

States. Travel is an obsession with Dr Ranjitsinh and he has visited more

than 90 countries till date. He has been a pioneer in establishing a

compensation scheme of cattle killed by tigers and leopards and diverted the

tribals of Orissa from their hunting practices. His academic credentials are

impeccable and he holds a PhD in Wildlife Ecology from Saurashtra

University. He has published more than 50 papers on wildlife and nature

related issues and has written two books on wildlife, including 'Beyond the

Tiger: Portraits of Asian Wildlife'. Dr Ranjitsinh espouses the non lethal

usage of wild animals and thinks that India's unique religious traditions do

not permit the wanton destruction of wildlife. An avid reader and collector

of books, he loves Hindustani Classical music and collects coins, stamps and

art related to wildlife. His stalwart efforts have been recognised by the

award of the Order of the Golden Ark of Netherlands in 1979 and by election

to the Global 500 Roll of Honour of the United Nations Environment

Programme(UNEP)in 1991.*

**

*INTERVIEW WITH DR M K RANJITSINH on 2nd January, 2009*

**

*INTERVIEWER : SHUBHOBROTO GHOSH*

**

*Dr M K Ranjitsinh is an impeccably polite man. Having agreed to give me

time for an interview, he requests me to take a seat whilst he arranges

piles of papers. " Just got to arrange all these, " he says and after having

done so, states he is ready to face " your barrage " .

The following conversation took place and the pattern of the

question-answer session has been preserved verbatim :

 

ME : To begin with, thank you for your time and patience in granting this

interview. To start off with, where are you from?

 

M K RANJITSINH : I am from Wankaner in Saurashtra in **Gujarat**.**

 

ME : I understand you belong to a royal family. Are you related to the

cricketer Ranjitsinhji?

 

M K R : Erstwhile royal family(smiles). I am not related to Ranjitsinhji the

cricketer, but I was named after him. He was known to my family as a friend.

 

ME : What is your educational qualification?

 

M K R : I have an MA in History(Honours) from St Stephen's College in **New

Delhi**. And I hold a PhD in Ecology from **Saurashtra** **University** of *

*Rajkot** that was awarded to me in 1983.**

 

ME : If you do not mind me asking you this, Royal families have

traditionally been accused of exploiting humans and they have also been

accused of exploiting animals. How do you defend your royal connections

especially when you relate it to your work for social causes and

particularly wildlife conservation?

 

M K R : This is a very interesting question, I must say it is a very

provocative question and sometime ago a journalist asked my father a similar

question. But I am not provoked at all. I'll take your question.

First, exploitation of humans. You tell me, if royal families were all

exploitative and abusive, why are members of ex Royal families still getting

elected in **India**? The electorate of **India** does not consist of fools

and certainly the people of **Gujarat** are no fools. See, you have to

understand that there were good rulers and there were bad rulers. If the

will of the people is manifested in elections and people weigh their choices

rationally, isn't there something to be said for ex members of Royal

families still getting elected in a democracy like India today?**

My father once mentioned, " In a monarchy, one family exploits the people(If

that is how you want to put it.) In a democracy, a thousand families exploit

the people. "

Now to come to your more germane question regarding exploitation of

animals, I have to admit that some princes of royal families were inveterate

hunters and slaughtered animals indiscriminately and such wanton killing was

and remains indefensible. But at the same time there were hunters like

Dharmakumarsinhji who were keen observers of fauna and he was an ardent

ornithologist. I also have to say that there was more wildlife in states of

yore where princes were interested in hunting. When I started as the of Wildlife, about 80% of the then existing wildlife reserves were

former hunting reserves of the British and of the princes. If one family

hunted many animals, in **Northern Madhya** Pradesh and Chhattisgarh there

were still more tigers in this country then than now after the Project Tiger

initiatives. Hunting was not a free for all during the colonial rule. *

 

* *

 

* *

 

*ME : What about sport hunting? The morality of taking a life for pleasure?*

*

 

M K R: I would not advocate sport hunting now. It will militate against the

current ethos of animal protection in **India**. But again I emphasise that

50 years ago, there was more wildlife in **India** than now. The Maharaja of

Dholpur in Rajasthan was a former hunter and would call individual Sambar by

name. Regarding the moral issue, there is no more or and no less morality in

taking a life by hunting than eating a chicken. What I do mean to say is

that there is no morality in taking a life per se. But there are different

kinds of hunting. One is hunting for possession, a selfish affair. And there

is hunting for eating. And many hunters turned into conservationists, for

example, Jim Corbett and Billy Arjan Singh. So you have to take into account

different perspectives on this issue. For example, does it help the cause of

the tiger by saving maneaters? I don't think so. I would rather have a

maneater shot than captured since an animal in captivity is as good as dead

as far as conservation goes. **

 

ME : What are your views on keeping wild animals in zoos ?

 

M K R : I am not in favour of keeping animals in captivity per se

but support ex situ conservation as a last resort for saving animals. But

certainly I am opposed to keeping animals in captivity for the enjoyment of

people. I well and truly believe that the best way to appreciate the beauty

of an animal is by viewing it in the wild. In **India**, people ogle at

animals in zoos and National Parks. It is our own fault. The whole

conservation effort is too tiger centric. People do not appreciate other

forms of wildlife. I was in Corbett recently when I spotted a leopard in a

tree. Some tourists were causing a ruckus so I asked them to stop making

noise. " This is just a leopard, not a tiger, " I told them sarcastically. And

believe it or not some of them left the spot immediately murmuring, " Only a

leopard, not a tiger, not a tiger. " This mindset has to change.**

 

ME : What are your views on the reintroduction of animals ?

 

M K R : Reintroduction of animals should be done the right way. It could

bring focus on the area which is very important. Take for example, the

Rhinos of Dudhwa that were brought there in 1979 from **Assam**. They are

still in an enclosure and in my opinion, they should have been released.**

 

ME : How do you view domestic animal welfare in the light of wild animal

welfare?

 

M K R : I am not against domestic animal welfare but there is a conflict

between wild animal welfare and domestic animal welfare because they compete

for the same resources in areas of wild habitat.

 

ME : How do you justify spending money and resources on animals when there

are people dying out of hunger and starvation and poverty in **India** ?**

 

M K R : If you are a welfare state, you have to give attention to poverty

alleviation. Is the solution to this the destruction of forests? Saving

animals means saving forests and ecosystems, the natural heritage of the

country. Land diverted for demographic use cannot be brought back for any

other use. How many people will you help by destroying forests? Saving

habitat of animals is the primary issue here, the animals come second. And

to what extent is the reclaimed land cultivable? Marginal land should be

forested. In **Western Satpura** in **Southern Aravallis** in Bhil tribal

areas in Madhya Pradesh there is an ecological holocaust. Madhya Pradesh and

Chhattisgarh have lost 32,000 square kilometers of forest areas in the last

sixty years. If everything in a democracy should be put to vote, then why

not put the future of the entire country to vote on every issue including

the fate of our religious shrines? Is that acceptable in a democracy? Is

that how a democracy should function? And does a democracy necessarily mean

a free for all?**

 

In this country, there is a religious sentiment to save forests and

wildlife. There is also a fear of retribution, a hangover from the colonial

past. In some places, people do not encroach on forests because they fear

dacoits. Wildlife also survives in demilitarized war zones. There is no

single overriding common denominator regarding protection of animals and

wildlife in **India**. Some communities are more conducive to conservation

principles than others. And the survival of forests in **India** is

inextricably linked to the survival of animals. If the tigers are not there

in Sariska, how will the forest survive? You have to have certain choices.

If we are prepared to protect our religious sites considering them to be

sacred, why are we not prepared to save our forests that are also part and

parcel of God's land?**

 

 

ME : What is your stance on the burning debate on 'Tigers versus Tribals'?

 

M K R : As I have mentioned, tigers cannot roam free as man eaters. But

there IS a distinction between tigers as a threat to human life and as a

threat to human property. In a protected park, people should be moved out.

In other areas, tigers would have to coexist with humans and they will not

survive. We have to look into ways to resolve this man animal conflict. The

aim should be to lessen damage to human property without destroying the

animals.

 

 

 

ME : You have written several books on wildlife. Who are your favourite

authors?

 

M K R : (Laughs) Too many to mention. Dunbar Brander, George Schaller,

Colonel C H Stockley, Dharmakumarsinhji, Salim Ali, Saroj Raj Chaudhury, Jim

Corbett, F W Champion. I liked Burrard's books on mountain fauna. Also books

written by Stebbing. Most of these people were pioneers in their respective

fields.

 

ME : Which wildlifers do you most admire?

 

M K R : I liked the conservation efforts made by the British and Indian

princes. I appreciate the works of Sanjay Deb Roy, Kailash Sankhala, Billy

Arjan Singh and Saroj Raj Chaudhury. Chaudhury was a remarkable man – he

contributed a lot to forest management in India and was the first director

of the nascent Wildlife Institute of **India**. **

 

ME : How many countries have you visited ?

 

M K R : (Laughs) Close to 90 I think. I love to travel and visit countries

and sometimes it so happens that two countries join to become one and one

country divides into two!

 

ME : What are your views on feral animals?

 

M K R : (laughs) What kind of feral animals?

 

ME : Any kind of feral animals.

 

M K R : They have to be considered on a case by case basis. In **New Zealand

**, they shot 18,000 Himalayan Tahr in two years, that is probably greater

than the number of Tahr that exist in **India**. There might be a case for

controlling feral Cheetal Deer in the Andamans. I would say that the local

fauna and flora would have to take precedence in conservation and if feral

animals are imposing a threat to them, they should be controlled.**

 

**The phone rings. Dr Ranjitsinh picks it up. It is his wife asking him to

come home early. " I think I will be late today, " he replies. " I have a guy

at the office here named who is asking me all kinds of awkward

questions. " He puts down the phone and says, " Pray continue. " **

 

ME : What are your views on sustainable use of wildlife?

 

M K R : I don't believe in sustainable use of wildlife and would be

uncomfortable with the concept. Sustainable use is never the ONLY way to

save animals. Killing wild animals would go against the grain of ethics in *

*India**. Ethically, it would be counterproductive. It would imply animals

should have monetary value in order to be preserved. I know some countries

accept sustainable use of animals but **India** is different in that we

believe in sanctity of life. There should be no lethal usage of animals. But

some sustainable use that does not harm the animals like using shed peacock

feathers is OK. We have to be careful though that this allowance is not

misused.**

 

ME : Are you a vegetarian?

 

M K R: I am turning into a vegetarian for ethical reasons. I have never been

a great meat eater.

 

ME : What are your views on euthanasia?

 

M K R : I would agree to euthanasia if there is no hope of recovery for an

animal.

 

ME : What are your views on corporates funding wildlife protection causes?

 

M K R : If there are no unwarranted strings attached, I don't have a problem

with accepting money from them. It is a moral judgment one has to make. As

long as it is not anti conservation, it is OK in my opinion to accept money

from industrial groups.

 

ME : Do you believe in God?

 

M K R : Yes, I do believe in God. Nature is God's creation. I have

worshipped in every religious shrine I have come across in my travels.

 

ME : If Nature is God's creation, who created God?

 

M K R : I have to be honest and say that I do not know the answer to this

question.

 

ME : What are your hobbies and your pastimes?

 

M K R : I love listening to Hindustani Classical Music. Also appreciate

sport, specially cricket and tennis. I collect coins and stamps bearing

animal pictures. Collect art related to wildlife. I love mountain walking

and mountain mammals and am a great admirer of mountain scenery. I am also

fond of books on animals and wildlife.*

 

 

 

*ME : Thank you very much for your time and trouble.*

 

 

 

*M K R : My pleasure.*