New Indian Express (Page 11), Feb 26, 2009
Numbers make sensational headlines but seldom tell the complete story. The fresh uproar over the tiger mortality figures released by the Centre was expected. But again media denied itself the opportunity to delve beyond the obvious.
Obviously, it is bad news that 39 wild tigers were killed in the last three years, especially after the Sariska lesson, an investigation by the CBI, a few prime ministerial interventions, a parliamentary legislation, a couple of new central agencies, and a four-fold hike in the budgetary allocation for protecting tigers.
The media outrage, however, is limited to slamming the usual suspects. We know political will is lacking, that resources available with the forest establishment are inadequate, and that there is constant pressure from the timber, the mining and the poaching mafias.
Despite these odds, certain pockets do show good results, thanks to a few dedicated people. But individual passion is not enough for turning the tide across India. For that to happen, we need a delivery system that works wonders when run by gifted individuals but does not trip even in the hands of mediocre staff.
Unfortunately, even four years after Sariska, we are far from institutionalising such a professional and transparent system. Most attempts at reform get sabotaged by internal bickering — both within the government and in the larger conservation fraternity. Often, even the media ends up playing in the hands of such negative forces.
Consider the recent drama over the ‘man-eater’ of Corbett. Forget science, even common sense was dumped by state officials in their hurry to declare the tiger a man-eater. But man-eaters make news. So when the Centre questioned the arbitrary labelling, a section of the media was no less miffed than the Uttarakhand forest bosses.
The tiger could have been left alone under strict monitoring or, if it was a young floating animal looking for territory, moved to a less disturbed forest area. But the field staff had no records, and given the sentiment of the people fuelled by media hype, it was too late for any scientific assessment. So the animal was trapped and dispatched to a zoo. Blame incompetent ground management or contradictory signals from the top, but India lost another wild tiger that was not counted among those 39.
The same story played out in Uttar Pradesh where the ground management failed to keep track of big cats spilling out to sugarcane fields. Once attacks on people were reported, forest authorities started issuing contradictory orders. Meanwhile, the media established the animals as man-eaters and agitated villagers left little room for scientific evaluation. Soon we ended up having gunmen chasing runaway tigers all over the state.
Similar contradictions fuelled the Panna fiasco. By the end of 2007, it was clear that no tigress was left in the reserve’s core area. Wildlife Institute of India (WII) and National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) confirmed the crisis and by mid-2008, even before tigers were airlifted to Sariska, it was decided that Panna would get a couple of tigresses from Bandhavgarh.
However, the Madhya Pradesh forest department made a mockery of itself by claiming that the tiger density in Panna was fine but a few tigresses would anyway come handy in producing more cubs. These statements triggered unnecessary controversy and the media, fed by a few experts ever anxious to settle personal scores with the forest department, kept rediscovering the story.
Not so long ago, when NTCA published the findings of a “transparent” (states were kept out of the process) national census in 2007, Madhya Pradesh challenged the report which indicated a sharp 60 per cent decline in the state’s tiger numbers. Eventually, the state accepted the new figure of 276 tigers but not before it had questioned the motive and competence of the central agencies. No wonder many in the union ministry think the better part of their jobs is to battle the limitations of the federal system and the sensitivity of centre-state (read Congress- BJP) equations.
Take the Rajasthan example. When the idea of relocating tigers from Ranthambhore to Sariska was first floated in late 2005, everybody agreed that the reserve must first plug the holes that led to the tragic local extinction. But without fulfilling the preconditions, the state forest department repeatedly pushed NTCA for a go-ahead. Top NGOs and experts, who found favour with the Rajasthan forest department, also joined the chorus. After resisting for over a year, NTCA finally succumbed to the accumulating pressure.
Not a coincidence that Rajasthan, like Madhya Pradesh, was another BJPruled state.
When the state wanted to airlift a third tiger from Ranthambhore, a few conservationists pointed out that picking up animals with established territories would upset them and also the rest of the resident population. This time, NTCA put its foot down and asked the state to find a floating animal — a young one in search of territory — for relocation.
Just when good sense seemed to have prevailed, the state forest bosses, miffed at being tasked with tracking a targeted animal rather than making do with any they could lay their hands on, started a not-so-covert campaign against the NTCA order. Suddenly we found unsuspecting cub reporters from national and local dailies criticising a basic scientific precaution in various “news” reports.
Complex issues often deny screaming headlines and competitive sensationalism rarely presents the true picture. Similarly, paper reforms will achieve little unless rogue states are reined in and the system is made immune to personal agendas.
(The author is an independent journalist and filmmaker. mazoomdaar@gmail.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment