Why thriving wildlife trade should not surprise anyone

Guns alone cannot protect our open, crowded forests, we need reliable local intelligence. But before the fight can start, forest bureaucracy must stop denying that poaching exists.

FirstPost, 11 March, 2013 
AUDIOVISUAL LINK

The customary headlines that follow every CITES meeting were reeled out last week after a string of media releases from Bangkok on 7 March. There is global anguish over the shocking numbers — seizures amounting to 1425 dead tigers from 12 tiger range countries between 2000 and 2012, or, more than two killing a week.

The Indian media highlighted the five illegal trading hotspots in Delhi, Kolkata (Sunderbans), Ramnagar (Corbett), Balaghat (Kanha-Pench) and Sathyamangalam (the Western Ghats) which retained its notoriety even after the killing of brigand Veerappan and disbanding of his ivory hunting gang nearly a decade ago.

A spurt in tiger poaching that claimed at least 34 big cats in the first five months of 2012 continues across the country. Since mid-November, three tigers have died of electrocution in live-wire traps set by poachers in and around Bandhavgarh’s Khitoli range. Since mid-January, suspected poisoning has killed four tigers in Karnataka’s Nagarhole. Last week, a one-year-old tigress was rescued from a metal jaw-trap in Dudhwa, Uttar Pradesh, with a damaged paw.

Since 2000, more than two tigers have been poached every week. Pic courtesy: CITES/WWF

While tiger mortality usually makes big news, leopards are being taken out at such regularity that making even a guesstimate has become a challenge. Since 2010, six dozen tigers and nearly 500 leopards have fallen to poachers. That is just the official count.

Compared to big cat pelts and bones, rhino horns command a much higher price. After a lull during 1999-2006, the lucrative trade made a strong comeback in Assam. In 2012, more than 22 rhinos were poached. This year’s toll has already reached 10, prompting a shoot-at-sight order against poachers.

Annually, up to 30,000 star tortoises worth several crores of rupees are harvested in our country. An estimated 50-70 per cent of India’s otter population has been hunted for their pelts. The paintbrush industry’s demand for 8-12 quintals of hair has killed more than a million mongooses – only 10-20g hair is obtained from each — since the 1990s.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to protect wild animals with physical vigil unless we convert open forests into fenced-in zoos. Even then, a large number of wildlife will continue to roam outside. The most effective deterrence to poaching is the fear of getting caught, prosecuted and punished. But after four decades of the Wildlife (Protection) Act and a ban on hunting, how are the syndicates still so active?

There are at least three reasons. We are yet to build the capacity to adequately combat poaching; the administration is mostly in denial; and the powers that be have strong incentive to back wildlife trade.

On paper, we have created the Special Tiger Protection Force in a number of reserves. The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) has even introduced a high-tech thermal imagery system for round-the-clock surveillance last year and proposed to procure drones to watch over remote forest terrain.

But far from compensating for quality human resource, any sophisticated initiative depends on it for success. Yet, there is no initiative to build a motivated, trained and agile workforce and adequately incentivise it for consistent field results.

Every forest administration needs eyes and ears on the ground. Since the average bureaucrat is not a natural sleuth or an earthy man-manager, field officers should be handpicked for wildlife divisions. Every division also needs a dedicated legal cell with trained staff to ensure that cases do not fall through when rare arrests are made. But even six years after the creation of the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, intelligence gathering and prosecution remains inadequate.

Unsurprisingly, the culture of denial is so deeply embedded in forest bureaucracy that most officers refuse to accept that poachers continue to be a threat in their territory. It is standard practice to play the jurisdiction card and disown animals that step out of park limits. Since officers in charge of less-protected areas neither have the resources to fight poachers nor are expected to, nobody is held accountable for poaching of, say, tigers in the Ramnagar forests adjacent to Corbett or rhinos across the road from Kaziranga.

When a suspicious carcass is found, the management tries to get away by attributing the death to anything — from food poisoning to snake bite – anything short of a suicide. Last year, an internal note of the Environment ministry pointed out that “many cases are straightaway declared as occurring due to natural causes or accidents without a detailed investigation to establish the same,” adding that “every case of tiger and leopard death would be henceforth treated as a case of poaching, unless otherwise proved beyond reasonable doubt”.

But a multi-billion dollar industry cannot bet its fortune on administrative laxity alone. So Veerappan funded political parties in two states for over a decade. Sansar Chand’s famous diary apparently had details of collusion with a number of Delhi’s political big guns. Insurgents protect trees for cover in their forest hideouts but have no qualms clearing Indravati of tigers or Manas of rhinos to fund arms deals.

During the 1980s and 1990s, when a number of prime north-east forests became inaccessible to the administration, more than 550 rhinos were poached. As the law and order condition improved in the late 90s, a shoot-at-sight regime forced an eight-year lull, particularly in Kaziranga, till the 2006 Assembly elections unleashed a cycle of “political reward killing”.

Poachers were back to claim 20 rhinos by 2007. Then again, after the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, around two dozen animals were killed till 2010. In 2011, only one rhino was poached till the Assembly elections in May. Nearly three dozen have been killed since till the Kaziranga administration finally retaliated last Wednesday gunning down two armed poachers.

While shoot-at-sight orders are necessary in places like Kaziranga to match the fire power of former militants joining the trade, this approach suits few other forests in India. Unlike Kaziranga, most of our forests house villages and opening fire at the sight of people in such areas is a recipe for disaster. Building an anti-poaching network based on field intelligence demands a lot of hard work. But there is no alternative if we are serious about protecting our wild.