After roadkills it could be train-kills in Bandipur

On a winter day in November 2013, a passenger train in the eastern state of West Bengal in India collided with a herd of 40 to 50 elephants, killing five adults and two calves. This was not an isolated event. Such grisly incidences have killed tigers, leopards and several other wildlife species in the past. In fact, train-kills like these have become a routine affair in India.

The country’s fiscal growth has necessitated the development and improvement of its surface transport infrastructure. New roads and railway lines have been implemented or planned in many wildlife-rich areas. In addition, several state governments have amplified their demands for new railway lines that would pass through key tiger and elephant habitats.

Bandipur, together with the adjoining Nagarahole Tiger Reserve, has one of the highest densities of large mammals in the world. These reserves connect with other protected areas including BRT, Mudumalai and Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserves, as well as Cauvery and MM Hills Wildlife Sanctuaries, forming one of the country’s largest contiguous wild tiger and elephant habitats (approximately 9,000 square kilometers, or 3,475 square miles). This may appear to be stamp-sized when compared to the colossal wildlife habitats in some parts of Africa and Southeast Asia. However, the area is highly productive, holding wildlife densities comparable to the African savannahs.

Approximate route of the proposed railway line passing through Bandipur and Wayanad preserves. Credit: Nature Conservation Foundation/Panthera

To a large extent, the Karnataka Forest Department has curtailed threats such as poaching. But linear intrusions such as highways and power lines continue to disturb these globally important wildlife habitats. Additionally, new threats are emerging as economic changes bring about new needs for India’s human populations. Growing human population and increased affluence among a section of the society has increased the demand for human use of wild areas. This demand is mostly for accommodation of industries such as electricity generation, surface transport, agriculture, tourism and other needs that either fragment or lead to a total loss of wildlife habitats.

The new railway line demanded by the state of Kerala, if implemented, will bisect 32 kilometers (20 miles) through two protected areas (Bandipur and Wayanad). This could eventually spell doom for wildlife, especially wide-ranging species such as tigers and elephants.

Construction of this railway line would only add to Bandipur’s battles against rampant development. Two national highways passing through this tiger reserve have demonstrated the negative impacts that linear intrusions can have on wildlife. Studies have shown highway development through wildlife habitat can lead to high rates of wildlife mortality due to vehicular collisions, genetic isolation, impediment of animal movement and increased agitation due to vehicular noise.

Traffic-related wildlife mortality is especially high at night. Several nocturnal species such as the civet, mouse deer, black-naped hare and various reptiles are regular victims of speeding vehicles. In addition, key prey species for tigers such as axis deer are also regularly hit. Young individuals are particularly susceptible to vehicular collisions at night due to their slow responses to speeding vehicles and their tendency to become transfixed by headlights.

In addition, vehicular traffic during the night could facilitate increased use of the area for illegal activities such as timber smuggling and wildlife poaching. Previously caught poachers in Bandipur and BRT Tiger Reserves confessed to having hunted at night on the highways passing through these reserves. Highway edges are a nighttime draw for many prey species due to increased visibility of predators; unfortunately, by lingering near roadways, these species become more visible to human hunters.

Through persistent efforts, forest officials, the state board of wildlife and conservationists convinced key policy and decision makers of the conservation merits of night traffic closure. They did this by providing a solution that would ensure commuters at night would remain unaffected: an alternative road that bypassed Bandipur, and which was only 35 kilometers (20 miles) longer than the highways inside the protected area.

Soon after, in a landmark move, the state government of Karnataka spent $7.8 million (INR 4.7 billion) to improve this alternative road. It passes along the edge of Nagarahole and Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuaries, and is a much less damaging option when compared to traffic passing through the core of Bandipur and Mudumalai Tiger Reserves at night.

Bengal tiger killed on Bandipur highway. Photo by D. Yathish.

However, the battle is not yet over. We continue to fight against business interests who have challenged the night closure in the Supreme Court of India. But for now, the ban has ensured at least a little peace for tigers, their prey and other denizens of Bandipur, Mudumalai and Wayanad.

Yet, the progress made by reducing the impact of highways has so far not been echoed by railways. The neighboring state of Kerala has remained the loudest and most persistent supporter of the proposed line. They remain obstinate despite the Indian Railway’s report that the project is not economically feasible, demanding a huge investment on the order of $700 million (INR 42.67 billion). Additionally, they say that environmental impacts can be very large. Based on this report, the Kerala High Court rejected the rail expansion project when business interests expressed opposition.

Protagonists of the railway line argue that an elevated track would be environmentally feasible. However, the funds needed to build such a track and the disturbances it would create during the construction phase (which often happens at snail’s pace in India) may be substantial and prohibitive.

For countries like India where protected areas are small and human population is great, finding solutions in the best interests of wildlife is of huge importance – and very complicated. It’s not just about keeping rail tracks out of the animals’ way. As our protected areas are small, the problems facing them are several folds higher than those in North America, where engineering solutions could prove to be win-win solutions. Any additional development within India’s protected areas comes at a huge cost to wildlife.

The proposed railway line would also be completely counterproductive to attempts at conserving wildlife habitats in the area. For example, the federal Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) in India has designated theadjoining areas of Bandipur as an eco-sensitive zone (ESZ). Developmental activities such as mining and construction of polluting industries and hydropower projects are prohibited or regulated in ESZs that exist in the immediate vicinity of a protected area. Developing a railway line either within the tiger reserve or in the limits of the ESZ is also prohibited. However, many business groups have been relentlessly using political pressure in effort to circumvent these regulations and implement the railway project through Bandipur.

Bandipur National Park. Photo by Praveen Ramaswamy.

Since December 2011, the Nature Conservation Foundation and Panthera have supported the efforts of the government to ensure that ESZs are designated around the protected areas of Karnataka. They convinced elected representatives and local communities, as well as provided technical input for the delineation and declaration of ESZs. This has been seen as a unique effort as in most areas it is difficult to convince political leaders of the benefits of conservation. However, a senior legislator from the area helped us garner support among other legislators and people within the district.

Additionally, the National Wildlife Action Plan drafted under the chairmanship of the country’s Prime Minister, mandates the Ministry of Surface Transport and Ministry of Railways to by-pass all protected areas and corridors while constructing roads and railways. Yet, governments continue to demand that these linear infrastructures pass through fragile landscapes.

There are several alternatives available for transporting freight and passengers while avoiding areas like Bandipur and Waynad. While these alternatives may be slightly more expensive, their ecological benefits are many. The budget of the Indian railways for the year 2014-15 is a colossal $10.74 billion (INR 643 billion), and building alternative routes that bypass wildlife-rich areas will make but a small dent in the allocated resources.

India has earmarked about four percent of the country’s landscape for wildlife preservation and protection. If the swarms of vehicles and speeding trains are kept out of these regions, it would neither affect the country’s aspiring economic growth, nor would it hinder any of our transportation problems.

Losing iconic or keystone species such as tigers and elephants to train-kills would truly undermine the conservation efforts of the government and the many private organizations working hard to preserve India’s unique and irreplaceable biological legacy. When it comes to saving the endangered species of this country, developing safer alternative routes for transport should be a mantra. The tiger cannot change its ecological behavior or move to another habitat; hence, it is up to us to redraw our plans.

——————————————————–

The orginal article was published in www.blog.mongabay.com

From Kerala to Uttarakhand, trampling on nature

There are two States that have constantly opposed wildlife and environment protection laws —Uttarakhand and Kerala. These States also rely heavily on nature tourism that brings in the much-needed economic support for them as well as to the people who depend on this industry.

Though they face the wrath of nature quite often — floods in Uttarakhand and sea erosion in Kerala are becoming a common feature — they generally look at the natural world with very different priorities. They determinedly and effectively market their natural world but their strategic views are at odds with nature conservation. They regularly bring in plebiscite, heavily opposing any move towards the protection of nature, be it the implementation of existing laws such as identification and notification of eco-sensitive zones or accepting the opinions of experts who have toiled for ages in the field of environment conservation.

Political reasons

What makes these two States heavily opposed to save nature and wildlife despite accruing direct economic benefits from nature? One of the political reasons for poor implementation of conservation laws was the fractured election results which bring in different ruling players at the Centre and the State making implementation of certain regulations that are on the concurrent list of the Constitution difficult.

However, the examples of these two States give a different picture as both are ruled by the same political party that holds power in New Delhi. Key conservation laws in the country including the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 and Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 are all contributions of the Nehru family, the principal icon of the Congress party. Surprisingly, their own parties oppose implementation of these laws.

Let us take for instance, stoppage of vehicular traffic at night through the core of Bandipur Tiger Reserve in Karnataka in affirmation of the Wildlife Protection Act. This has been challenged by the Kerala Government at three different platforms — the High Court, the Supreme Court and the National Green Tribunal. Though an alternative exists and the government of Karnataka has even provided funding to the tune of Rs.48 crore to improve the alternative road, the neighbours are not content. Similarly, all forest conservation laws have been severely violated to facilitate boulder mining and building power projects in Uttarakhand.

If States show disrespect and neglect towards laws, are we proceeding in the right direction in this federal system? Now, States even question the scientific basis of nature conservation. Till date, nature preservation was largely based on aesthetics, and to a less extent on ethical values that resulted in conservation success stories. In future, battling for nature based on these values will be challenged. This highlights a basic lacuna in wildlife science.

On management

Wildlife science rarely addresses questions that are relevant to management or to elected representatives. These are: How to reduce human-wildlife conflict? What is the value of ecosystem services of a wildlife habitat? What is the scientific basis of habitat management that is the pretext of developing fodder and water for wildlife?

Unfortunately, we have no quantitative evidence in the Indian context to answer these questions that are very important for managing wildlife habitats or that have been causes of erosion of public support for wildlife conservation.

Though we boast of high quality wildlife science that has been carried out for decades, we have failed to provide answers to problems that are pertinent to real world conservation. Increasingly, scientists hide behind court orders or disasters such as the recent elephant conflict near Bangalore, that claimed five lives in a short span of three days, to claim that science is being used for management. They fail to actively market their research findings. If wildlife science continues to pursue subjects that is based only on individual’s interests, it will have less and less value for nature preservation. Nor will it be of any use for the betterment of society that is one of the key selling points of nature conservation.

I can expect an eloquent response to this article about the responsibility of science culminating with publications, but the real world aspects of conservation in a country like India are often beyond the ambit of peer-reviewed science.

If wildlife science continues to show apathy towards real-world conservation problems like the States do towards conservation laws, there could soon be an end to the support of those who have been key to preserve our ecologically important areas. There could be a day when they will learn their lessons through costly mistakes.

This article was published in The Hindu on 06-07-2013