Govt looks at developing degraded forests as private concessions

The idea was first discussed between Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the Global Investors Summit in Indore last year.

The Indian Express, 10 September, 2015

The Central Government is actively considering a proposal to amend the Wildlife Act and convert large tracts of degraded forests to private concessions meant for high-density tiger tourism. The plan is to invite investment for developing parcels of 20-50 sq km forestland as concessions under the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model with fences, a safari road network covering at least 70 per cent of the area, and cameras at waterholes and artificially-built tiger dens for live streaming at restaurants inside such properties. 
The Environment Ministry is currently scrutinising the technological and legal aspects of the proposal, which was discussed at a high-level meeting in August.
“This is a policy matter. Yes, we had initial discussions but no final decision has been taken. Now the issue is with the division that deals with forest policy in the ministry,” said Vinod Ranjan, additional director general (wildlife). 
The idea was first discussed between Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the Global Investors Summit in Indore last year. Subsequently, ‘private investment in forest and wildlife conservation’ was placed as the first item on a list of proposals sent by Chouhan to Modi on October 17. 
In his letter, Chouhan proposed that the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, be suitably amended to allow private investment, arguing that the time has come to free wildlife from the “absolute hold” of the state, which is constrained by financial limitations. 
The Environment Ministry then sought a concept note on the project from the Madhya Pradesh government, which was handed over early this year. 
The Indian Express has examined the concept note and other official documents related to the proposal (see box), which indicate that the Government is expected to share a part of the cost as Project Development Expenditure (PDE) and Viability Gap Funding (VGF), since trophy hunting — the mainstay of such concessions abroad — is not permitted in India.

The concept note, however, is silent on obtaining the consent of local communities under the Forest Rights Act. It states that 10-20 per cent of the forest area under each project can be “managed” to meet the community’s requirement of firewood and fodder. This should suffice as concessions will create jobs for locals and also reduce crop raiding, it suggests. 
The note claims that such concessions will rejuvenate degraded forests, lessen the tourism pressure on existing tiger reserves, serve as tiger corridors or buffer to adjoining sanctuaries, reduce crop damage, and create jobs for locals. 
The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has defined a degraded forest as “a secondary forest that has lost, through human activities, the structure, function, species composition or productivity normally associated with a natural forest type expected on that site… and maintains only limited biological diversity”. 
Incidentally, the Finance Ministry had sent a letter to the states on December 11, 2014, backing private investment in zoos. It is now being argued within the government that such investment in forest land and wildlife management will be more helpful to conservation. 

First ever leopard census: India should not feel too smug too soon

The Indian Express, 7 September, 2015

The findings of India’s first ever leopard count have made happy headlines. The numbers, however, deserve closer scrutiny. 
The census put the total leopard population of the country at 12,000-14,-000. It did not, however, account for 12,000-14,000 leopards in the country. Neither did it survey the entire country. It was restricted to the tiger states, except West Bengal and the North-East states. Non-tiger states — such as Himachal, Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana or Punjab — were not covered. Even within the tiger states, the census left out areas — north-west Rajasthan, for example — where chances of spotting tigers were remote. After all, these findings on leopards were an offshoot of the all-important tiger census. 
In fact, the happy range of 12-14,000 leopards for all of India in the national census is only a guess-estimate derived from a figure of 7,910 leopards present in and around tiger forests of 13 states. This figure of 7,910 itself is an extrapolation from 1,647 individual leopards that were actually photographed — some, multiple times — by camera traps set up to count tigers. 
The complex science of extrapolation used by the Wildlife Institute of India has never been adequately peer reviewed or even made fully public. While we should trust the researchers to arrive at an estimate of 7,910 — from 1,647 — for the entire sampled landscapes, it is anybody’s guess how the national range of 12,000-14,000 was derived since it includes vast, diverse landscapes that were not sampled at all. For all we know, the real leopard count could be significantly higher. 
Or lower. 
Take Uttarakhand, for example. The present ‘national census’ estimates 703 leopards in the tiger forests of the state. The state forest department consistently counted more than 2,000 leopards for the entire state in 2003, 2005 and 2008. Since the present census did not cover the high altitude non-tiger areas, we may smugly assume that more than double the number present in lower forests are lurking somewhere up there to make up for the 2008 count. 
Or should we keep our fingers crossed and wait for the next Uttarakhand census? 
Forget 12,000-14,000, is the number 7,910 itself reassuring? What it tells us is that for every tiger, there are approximately four leopards present in and around our tiger forests. However, according to the CBI’s wildlife crime cell, seizure reports indicate that for every tiger skin, at least seven leopard pelts are smuggled out. So what should we make of that? 

EXAMPLE UTTARAKHAND 
Leopard Count 
2003   2005   2008   Now 
2092     2105     2335     703* 
* Excluding high-altitude areas