Project Leopard

Uttarakhand Forest Department is considering the launch of a State Level Project for the conservation of leopard. Project Leopard, as it was referred to in the newspaper report, is the need of the day. Poaching, panic reactions, low prey base in the natural habitat of the leopard in the State, scavenging by leopards, attacks on human beings, and the comparatively lower public profile than that of the tiger make it a difficult endeavor to carry out expecting support from the public who thinks all leopards are man-killers.

It is evident that the Project Leopard will have to be designed and implemented very carefully. The newspaper report indicates that appropriate experts have been involved in the development of the Project. I will like the following points to be examined and, if found useful, accommodated for action in the Project:

1. My personal experience over the past five years of my residence in a village at the edge of forest with leopards in it indicates that the leopards avoided being spotted by human beings. People in and around my village had seen a fleeting glimpse of a leopard only on two occasions over the past five years. There was no panic, and it was treated as a normal incident, contrary to the way the effect of the sighting of leopards is reported in the print media. Perhaps the people with urban background are too far removed from nature to understand that mere sighting of a leopard is not an indicator of the presence of a man-eater. Here, Jim Corbett seems to have left a permanent psychological set back on the minds of the people through his hair-raising adventure with the Man-eating Leopard of Rudraprayag. The Project will need to work for the change in the attitude of the people toward the sighting and presence of leopards in the forests near their habitation. How it will be effectively done is a matter for the experts.
2. Post retirement years have kept me working for wildlife conservation. Conflict with wild animals is a burning issue. I have visited and interacted on my own with people from a few leopard affected sites, such as Khankra near Rudryaprayag; Dogadda, Laldhang, Sigaddi, Kanva Ashram, Kimsar and Garahkot in Pauri; in around Rajaji National Park and Corbett National Park; and villages near Doiwala, Jhajhra, IMA, FRI, WII and Asarori at the fringes of Dehradun. A fair idea was given to me by the people, and pointers that had bearing on the behavior of the leopard and other wildlife came from their way of life. These pointers gave reasons why leopards turned into problem animals.
1. One significant issue was that of disposal of waste from their homes. In most of the areas people casually threw their domestic waste matter just across the road from their residences, or at random at the periphery of their villages. Even dead domestic animals and animal waste is thrown about in the same casual manner. Leopards are opportunistic scavengers. The dumped waste attracts small mammals, birds and other animals, free living as well as domestic, (including pigs, dogs, monkeys, poultry birds), which in turn attract leopards who find new scavenging opportunities as well as potential prey in such animals. Project Leopard will have to address to the development of domestic waste disposal approaches so that people correlate their own role in the mitigation of the conflict and conservation of wildlife in Uttarakhand.
2. Forest fires and people who have made sale of firewood as their calling intensify the problem of leopards others face. Fires take place mostly when leopards have cubs accompanying their mothers. Head-loaders bring out firewood all the year round from the forest to meet the enormous and regular demand of bakeries and small roadside dhabas near the cities. These centers of heavy firewood consumption use highly expensive LPG sparingly. The combined effect of fires and the year round cutting of small trees and bushes by the head loaders  is that the forest gets exhausted of its resource-base for the leopards, particularly where the forests  are close to towns and cities, by the time summers set in. The effect of re-grown vegetation in the forest after monsoons is off-set by mid summer by these two factors. The prey base and the shelters under the green cover are drastically reduced at a time when leopards need them  most for raising their families. Fires drive leopards with cubs closer to the human habitation and thinned ground cover makes their sighting frequent. The Project may need to develop strategies to overcome these constantly present hurdles in conservation of leopard habitat.
3. Leopard habitats are changing in their quality and extent inside the forests even with management interventions. No surveys or studies have been done by anyone on the relationship between management practices and wildlife shifts till date on this aspect of leopard ecology; the effect of management practices and unplanned human interventions need to be researched. The Project must establish a research cell for not only leopard habitat and prey base studies but also for studies on their inter-relationships with co-predator like the tiger and co-scavengers like wild pig, dogs, monkeys etc., the dynamics of prey substitution and distribution, and other related issues.
4. Not all leopards are man-killers. Jim Corbett could find only two leopards, the Panar and the Rudraprayag man-eating leopards, during his entire life as a hunter of man-eaters. The leopard and tiger density at that time was many-folds of what we have today. Possession of firearms by the local people was a rarity in those days. The real man-eaters are not easy to deal with. People lived insecure and completely helpless lives in the far-flung isolated hamlets, and fell easy prey for the man-eaters. But too many leopards have been declared man-eaters over the past five years, and also shot. Jim Corbett could eliminate the problem by shooting just two real man-eaters, but we have failed even after killing a larger number of declared man-eaters. Our actions have supported and strengthened the idea in the minds of the people that every leopard is a potential man-eater. Media persons are also people and they also go along with such ideas. Most of the incidents of leopard attacks resulting in injuries to the people have taken place when leopards were surrounded by excited and violent mobs and  their escape route was blocked. People need to know the procedures and techniques to deal with a cornered leopard, whether in or outside a house. The Project will help people and conserve leopards if such issues are brought under its agenda.
5. I am not convinced with the projected figures for the population of leopards in the State. The ground evidences do not support these figures; our methods and models for estimation of leopard populations do not recognize the limitations of the difficult terrain over which the leopards occur, the spatial niches they occupy and the habitat suitability indices for the animal. The methods found useful in plains areas are not effective in the outer and middle Himalayan leopard ranges. The only approach for assessing the actual area and determining the sampling units for leopards in our hills is the down to earth Habitat Occupancy Mapping technique. Even though some knowingly speak about, it is neither understood nor effectively carried out even by the most of the well meaning experts. Project Leopard will have to develop accurate techniques for understanding where and how many leopards are resident in the forests and scrub of the Uttarakhand landscape.

Lest my suggestions are considered assertive and exhaustive I should clarify that I do not believe that the issues involved are unknown to the officers of the forest department, or to the experts on the subject. I have dealt with Project Elephant and Project Tiger, and man-wildlife conflicts. I have shared some of the points I have presented to the Uttarakhand Forest Department for consideration while formulating the Project. 

MAN, MASK AND MANEATER

Introduction

       During a period of six years between 1860 and 1866 A.D., a total of 4,218 people lost their lives due to tiger attacks in the forests of the combined delta of the Ganges- Brahmputra river system. Indiscriminate hunting of the tiger population down to its threshold limit and the decimation of its habitat from about 20,000 sq. km. at the turn of the last century to less than 10,000 sq. km. in the recent years could not put a check on the tiger attacks. The Project Tiger authorities in Sunderban Tiger Reserve identified the control of the man-tiger conflict arising out of the tiger attacks as the key problem in the region. Over the past 14 years they have, through a chain of experimental innovations, succeeded in reducing the average annual toll of human life due to tiger attacks from about 60 in 1973 to less than 30 in the recent years. The ultimate goal is the complete stoppage of the loss of human life while maintaining a viable population of the endangered species in its pristine habitat. As another link in the chain of ongoing experiments for devising suitable methods and means to protect human lives, human face-masks were tried out on the principle of mimicry in nature during 1986-87.

The Hypothesis

       When stalking its intended victim, the tiger takes care to choose the moment of its attack when its quarry is off-guard. Case studies of tiger attacks on human beings in Sunderbans indicated that almost all the attacks were made from behind, the unguarded side of the victims. An alert backward stare may, therefore, reduce the chances of attack by denying the tiger an opportunity to catch its human quarry off-guard. In nature, many organisms use false eye-spots for protection against their enemies. Human face-masks worn on the backside of the head create an illusion of watchfulness on the part of the wearer.

Materials and Methods

      2500 human face masks made of lightweight rubberized plastic material were distributed among the people permitted to work in the buffer zone of the tiger reserve during a period of one year from November 1986 to October 1987. The yearlong experiment was divided into three phases, designed to cover one complete annual cycle of human activity and exposure to conditions under which tiger attacks take place. Phase I covered the activities of fishing and wood cutting in timber coupes between November 1986 and March 1987; Phase II covered mostly the activity of honey collection during the hot months of April and May 1987; and phase III covered the activity of fishing between the months of June 1987 and October 1987.

      In Sunderbans, people live in boats when working in the forest areas. Fishermen confine their movements to estuarine channels and do not enter deep into the forest on foot. The woodcutters work primarily in the timber coupes in large groups and advance into the forest over land at the heads of the clearings made by coupe operations. Only the honey collectors penetrate the mangrove wilderness deep on foot. All parties camp in boats anchored away from the banks of the estuarine channels for fear of tiger attacks. The activity of honey collection places the workers in the most vulnerable situation for tiger attacks. The honey collectors virtually invite tiger attacks by crawling through dense tangle of mangrove vegetation, unarmed and visually separated from one another by thick screens of the under growth, till a honey comb is spotted; all caution is thrown to the winds and unmindful of where they step, their eyes riveted on the honey bee buzzing through the mangrove foliage overhead, they often fail to notice the presence of the tigers, and fall easy victims to their attacks. Whereas Phase I was the introductory phase of the experiment, Phase II subjected it to the severest possible test for its efficacy as a protective device. Phase III was designed to find out the impact of the experiment and its acceptability to the local people.

       During the first phase masks were distributed only to the people who came forward for voluntary participation in the experiment, while in Phase II the use of masks was made compulsory for the honey collectors. The demand for masks was treated as an indicator of the interest of the people in the mask as a useful device in protection of human lives and therefore an indicator of the impact of the experiment on the local people. During Phase III masks were distributed only on demand.

        All cases of tiger attacks were investigated by a team of officers of the Research Wing of the tiger reserve. The technique of investigation included verification of the evidences left behind on the spots of accidents, cross examination of the companions of the victims and sample cross-checks through informal discussions with the survivors of the attacks. The system of awarding compensation to tiger victims ensured reporting of all incidents of tiger attacks on human beings in Sunderban Tiger Reserve.

Results and Discussions

       During Phase I, out of a total of 4,943 people permitted to work in the buffer zone of the tiger reserve, 877 workers – 410 coupe workers and 467 fishermen – volunteered to use the masks after the purpose and the method of use of the masks were explained to them. From among the volunteers, 1 coupe worker and 2 fishermen lost their lives due to tiger attacks; among the rest 5 were attacked by the tigers. None of the persons attacked were wearing masks at the time of attack. The coupe worker and the fishermen had been using the masks when working in the coupe or catching fish respectively i.e.., pursuing the activities for which permits had been taken. The coupe worker was attacked when during a lunch break he had taken off his mask and gone to catch fish for lunch 2 km. away in a nearby creek. The fishermen were attacked when they had taken a break from fishing and, leaving their masks in their boats, stepped into the nearby bank to collect firewood for cooking their meals. None of the mask wearers were attacked by the tigers, and the results obtained during Phase I encouraged the continuation of the experiment into the next phase.

       During phase II 548 honey collectors and 373 fishermen worked in the buffer zone of the tiger reserve. In all 882 masks were issued to the honey collectors who often needed replacements for masks due to their strings getting entangled in the undergrowth as they crawled through the mangrove vegetation in search of honey combs. The fishermen took 137 masks. Seven honey collectors and four fishermen lost their lives due to tiger attacks. None of the victims were wearing masks at the time of attacks. During the first week of April 1987 two honey collectors lost their lives. Stricter enforcement of the use of masks by the honey collectors while working in the forest resulted in total stoppage of tiger attacks during the rest of the honey collection season; during the entire month of May 1987 no honey collector was attacked by the tigers. All the fishermen who lost their lives during Phase II were attacked when collecting firewood in the forest; none of them wore masks at the time of entering the forest.

      During Phase III, 604 fishermen received masks on demand; all of them had also used masks on earlier occasions. There were no casualties among this section of fishermen, whereas 11 fishermen from among those who had not taken masks died between June 1987 and October 1987 due to tiger attacks.

       An unusual phenomenon was observed during Phase II of the experiment. The permits for honey collection in the tiger reserve are issued from Bagna and Sajnekhali stations of Project Tiger only. Unless there is an accident, the permit holders do not surrender their permits before the honey collection season is officially closed down because their earnings depend on the quantum of honey collected by them. The permit holders from both the stations work in the same areas. The permit holders from villages around Bagna are more orthodox and were found to be reluctant to use the masks for the fear of incurring the wrath of their traditional protective forest deities. On the other hand the permit holder from Sajnekhali, who often get influenced by the radical ideas of visitors to Sajnekhali Tourism Complex and forest stations, needed little persuasion to use the masks in the forest. Consequently, not a single life was lost from among the permit holders from Sajnekhali. The permit holders from Bagna suffered all subsequent tiger attacks on honey collectors during this phase.

       The permit holders from Sajnekhali complained of frequent sightings of tigers and reported being followed by tigers for periods ranging from half an hour to eight hours. Although, they were not attacked by the tigers the fear created by the sudden appearance of the tigers presently compelled them to surrender their permits when the honey collection season was at its peak. By 11the May, 1987 all but one of the permits were surrendered by the honey collectors from Sajnekhali; the last one was surrendered on 15 May, a fortnight before the scheduled time for closure of the operation.

      In spite of the heavy casualties suffered by the honey collectors from Bagna, no one complained of similar encounters with tigers, nor did they surrender their permits till the end of the season.

       During informal discussions with the honey collectors, it was revealed that the honey collectors from Sajnekhali were invariably alerted by the tiger itself as it disturbed the undergrowth behind them while following them. None of the Bagna people accompanying the ill-fated tiger victims knew of the presence of the tiger till their companions were attacked. The honey collectors from Sajnekhali also stated that after following them for some time, the tigers invariably came out in the open , sometimes compelling them to return to their boats, and went away after casting a baleful glance at them. No such incident was recalled by the Bagna people. None of the Bagna people held any faith in the utility of mask as a protective device, while a section of people from Sajnekhali felt that masks may be useful in the forest, but the majority of them expressed that the Sunderban Tiger is too clever to be deceived by the masks for long.

Conclusions

        It was the first time ever that the principle of mimicry was tried out in wildlife management for the control of a serious hurdle in making conservation a mass movement. Although it is too early to arrive at an undisputed conclusion regarding the utility or otherwise of the mask, the preliminary results obtained during the yearlong experiment indicate the possibility of developing the mask as a protective device against tiger attacks on human being in Sunderbans. Phase II of the experiment has given important indications that call for replications of the experiment till the hurdles created in pursuit of the experiment because of the traditional beliefs are overcome, and the uninhibited participation by the local people yields concrete results.

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank the staff of Sunderban Tiger Reserve in general, and Shri N.R. Mandal and G. Tanti the Research Wing and Shri B.K. Sengupta, Asstt. Field Director of the Reserve, in particular, for following up the various aspects of the experiment all though its yearlong course with truly scientific zeal and ensuring the elimination of personal bias. The author is also grateful to the people of Sunderbans for their participation in the experiment.

MONITORING TIGERS IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY INDIA

Introduction

The indiscriminate hunting of tigers had greatly reduced their numbers in the country’s forests: from 40,000 at the beginning of the twentieth century, to 4,000 tigers in 1965 (Gee, 1964). The rapid disappearance of tiger populations was noticed first by some hunters, naturalists and foresters (Thapar, 2001). The Divisional Forest Officer of Palamau Division in Bihar carried out the first ever systematic survey in Garu Range of his division in 1934 (Nicholson, 1934). The exercise was repeated in Palamau in 1936 and 1938 (Chaudhuri, 1938). It marked the beginning of the monitoring of tiger populations in India.

Over the next 75 years, 1934 to 2010, the monitoring of tiger populations progressed through three distinct phases of development. The first phase covered the years from 1934 to 1971, and during this phase different field methodologies for counting tigers were tried out in some tiger habitats. Since 1953, monitoring of tiger populations became an annual feature in Kanha. Schaller, during his research study from 1962 to 1964 in a small part of the Park, (Schaller, 1967) identified 11 adult tigers from their facial markings (Panwar, 1979b). S.R. Choudhury developed Co-operation Tiger Census methodolgy in 1972 (Choudhari 1970, 1971, 1972). Mishra applied Stratified Sampling approached to his Track Counts in Palamau for four years (Mishra, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973).

The next phase, from 1972 to 2004, systematized State and National level monitoring of tiger populations. The first all India tiger census took place in 1972 using ‘Co-operation Tiger Census’ methodology, and the methodology employed by Project Tiger from 1973 to early 1980s (Choudhury, 1970a, 1970b, 1971, 1972a, 1972b, 1979); ‘Pugmark Census Technique’ (Panwar, 1979a), a highly simplified deviant of Co-operation Tiger Census replaced ‘Co-operation Tiger Census’ in mid 1980s and remained in use by Project Tiger till 2004. A new statistical estimation approach using Camera-Trap and Capture-Mark-Recapture model was suggested for monitoring tiger populations (Karanth, 1987, 1988, 1995, 1999, 2003; Karanth et al. 2000, 2002). Refinements in field methodologies were suggested by some (Rishi, 1997, Singh, 1999); analysis of pugmarks using computer software was introduced in West Bengal (Roy, Undated). A group of specialists recommended a judicious mix of both the modified field methods and statistical approaches for use in monitoring tiger populations (Singh, et al, 1997).

The third phase in the development of monitoring techniques started in 2005 by the newly constituted National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA). Numerical census of tigers was replaced by Systems Analysis approach using a heirarchical model and statistical estimation techniques for determining the status of tiger populations (Jhala et al. 2005a, 2005b). Other methods using different indices, such as the Pugmark (Digital Image) Analysis technique (Sharma et al, 2001), and the estimation of tiger populations using DNA profiles (Goyal, et al., 2007) are being developed for monitoring tiger populations in India.

The paradigm shift in the approach for monitoring tigers – NTCA’s holistic approach

National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) made a mention of the criticism faced by the pugmark based census methodology and the limitations of the alternative proposal to estimate tiger densities using camera traps as the reason for adopting their new approach.

In this approach NTCA applied a hierarchical model and statistical framework for monitoring tigers and other animals. The entire tiger range in India was converted to 6 Landscape Complexes and used Forest Beats or equivalent areas covering 15-20 sq km of wildlife habitat as the smallest sampling units. The units were categorized in terms of tiger sign abundance classes – high, medium, low and no density class – at Forest Beat sampling unit level and at 100 km2 area resolution level. Population densities for tigers were estimated in 5 – 13 replicates of the size of 100-200 km2 in each of the tiger sign abundance classes. Mark-Recapture sampling method using camera traps was used to find out tiger densities. Extrapolation of densities was carried out at landscape level, followed by conversion of densities/indices into numbers. Computer programs specially designed for the purpose were used for the analysis of the data. (Jhala, Y.V., et al., 2005a, 2005b, 2008).

The results of the holistic approach were declared in 2008. The estimated all India tiger population is reported to be between 1,165 and 1,657, with a mid value of 1,411 tigers in India. For public consumption the mid value is reported as the population of tigers in India. (Jhala, Y.V., et al., 2008).

Reliability of results from current approach for monitoring and conservation of tigers

A. National Level Monitoring:

1) The figure of 1,411 tigers is the arithmetical mid-value of a statistical range with a minimum value of 1,165 and a maximum of 1,657 – a margin of 492 numbers. A large population is in an indeterminate grey area; making the reported status of tigers in India vague.

2) The field data was collected in 2005-2006 over an extended period of time, which does not define a temporal reference point for comparison with later date estimates. Small populations of tigers can disappear in an extended time frame. There was no fixed date(s) common to all places from where the data was collected and the data does not lend itself for comparison with any other data for monitoring the status of tigers in India.

3) The results do not give the structure of tiger populations: the age, sex and breeding status of the tigers; and the methodology is not designed to provide information on juveniles, cubs and transient tigers.

4) The methodology could not generate reliable tiger habitat occupancy maps and other related records.

a. For instance, the map for northern West Bengal shows tiger occupancy in Gorumara National Park that had no record of resident tigers over the past more than five years; and it shows absence of tigers in tiger occupied areas like Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary and the northern part of Buxa tiger reserve where one was recently photographed.

b. The sampling based statistical estimation of the extent of area under tiger occupation is erroneous for Sunderbans and many other tiger habitats. Therefore, the extrapolation of densities calculated from such erroneous base-line data cannot give accurate information.

B. State Level Monitoring

Estimated Tiger Populations In Some States

STATES                            MIN         MID-VALUE        MAX

BIHAR                              7                        10                   13
CHHATISGARH              23                      26                   28
ORISSA                            37                      45                  53
RAJASTHAN                    30                     32                   35
KERALA                           39                     46                   53
ARUNACHAL                  12                     14                   18
MIZORAM                        4                       6                     8
N. WEST BENGAL           8                       10                  12

*Source: Status of Tigers, Co-predators & Prey in India. NTCA.

At the State level, too, the results do not help in meaningful understanding of tiger populations:

a. The range of values in small populations is too wide to given any meaning to the status of tigers in the State.

b. So long as the local information places the figure for tigers anywhere within the range – arrived at by a more trusted scientific exercise by an authority no less than NTCA – there is no cause for any alarm even if poachers take a few tigers, as long as their presence or activity is not detected. The advantage goes to the poachers.

C. The Information Generated by the Approach

The conservation of tiger in India starts with the knowledge about some basic aspects. It is evident that even 5 years after the collection of field data the exercise failed to provide the crucial information the report was supposed to have given:

a) How Many Tigers? …Not precisely known at national or state levels!

b) Population Trends? …Cannot be known; structure of the populations is not known!

c) Areas where decreasing & why? …Cannot be known; tiger occupancy maps and records are defective!

d) Status of tiger’s wild prey? …Not yet available.

e) State of tiger habitat? …Not yet available.

f) Spacing & connectivity of Wildlife Populations? …Not yet available.

The Question of Monitoring Tigers for Tiger Conservation

The shift from field methods to statistical models made no improvement in the monitoring of tiger populations and habitats. The process has become tardy, time consuming, heavy on manpower, uneconomic, unverifiable, time warped and hence redundant and unsustainable; the choice is: take it or leave it!

(A). Application of Statistical and System Analysis Models

One has to understand that Statistics is a tool and not an end in itself; and that the statistical models create virtual reality. The reliability of the statistical models used in the systems analysis approach depends on what information is being fed to the model designer. A model is nothing more than “…an abstraction of the true experimental situation, representing all relevant features of reality. When used in population estimation, the model will be constructed in such a way that the unknown quantities are expressed in the terms of known or observed quantities” (Overton, 1971). “The first step to successful Systems Analysis is the careful identification of questions to which the model is to be addressed.” (Overton, 1977). But its acceptability depends on the confidence it can generate in the mind of the user – in this case the wildlife manager.

Systems, especially natural systems, are large and hierarchical, i.e., composed of complexes of systems within systems. There is intractability of very large systems for development of differential equations. “Moreover, the system properties emerge not only from their components but also from their linkages. As the systems become larger and more complex, our ability to predict system behaviour becomes less certain.” (Reed, 1995).

It follows that the enormous diversity of the tiger occupied ecosystems in India poses a formidable challenge for application of a hypothetical hierarchical model developed in one or two landscapes to the entire range of diverse ecosystems. Models for Satpura-Maikal landscape cannot be applied to the mangrove forests of Sunderbans or Terai grasslands, or tropical evergreen and semi-evergreen rain forests, or desert and scrub ecosystems.

Modeling is an art. The research work and refinement of Systems Analysis, and statistical sampling approaches is massive in the U.S.A. The adaptation of models developed in other countries does not obviate the need to develop further experience by working in other biogeographically and ecologically different landscapes. At present even the basic research in the Indian tiger habitats is patchy and inadequate for developing models one can confidently apply in India.

(B). Application of Field Methods in Census and Research Work

One of the two field methods, which the field officers had worked with under Project Tiger, used tiger pugmarks as an index for ascertaining individual tiger’s territorial occupancy; and the other, tiger’s identity for estimating tiger populations in a given area. Over the years the distinction between the two has been mislaid and many people think they are one and the same. A controversy was generated in a review of the field censuses in 1987. (Karanth, 1987, 2003; Day, Undated; Banks Undated).

The review of the data from field censuses (Karanth, 1987)

(a). Growth Rates, Density and Biomass of Tiger Populations

Table – 2

Tiger population over the years

Sites                                1972   1979   1984   1989   1993   1995   1997   2001-02

Tiger Reserves                 268       711   1,121  1,327 1,366  1,333  1,498      1,576

Outside Tiger Reserves  1,559    2,304  2,884  3,007  2,384  2,010  2,066

Total                              1,827    3,015  4.005  4,334  3,750  3,508  3,642

Compilation based on the periodic reports of Project Tiger Directorate, Govt. of India.

1. After analyzing the data from the tiger census figures for 1972 and 1984, and using the information from the research work of some wildlife research scholars in and outside India, the review concluded:

i. Between 1972 and 1984, the census figures show phenomenal growth in tiger numbers over the years in almost all parts of the country. Even relatively poor tiger habitats like Bandipur showed high growth rate of 14%, per annum for over 12 years in succession. The research studies in Nepal and Kanha indicate that the growth rates of tiger populations in excess of 6% were abnormal.

ii. The 1984 census data indicated excessive densities and biomass reached by tigers in Indian tiger reserves. The census figures showed that 6 out of 18 tiger reserves, namely, Corbett, Bandhavgarh, Dudhwa, Sunderbans, Kanha, and Ranthambhore tiger reserves, had tiger densities that ranged between 10.89 and 5.79 km2 per tiger, which exceeded the stipulated range.

The tiger biomass in the above mentioned 6 tiger reserves exceeded 10 kg/ km2 whereas a really superior habitat can only support a tiger biomass of 7 to 10kg/km2. Overall, the tiger biomass in ranged between a low of 2.08 kg/ km2 in the Indravathi tiger reserve and a high of 19.58 kg/ km2 in the Corbett tiger reserve.

2. The experimental evaluation of field methods (Karanth, 1987).

With a hypothesis that the pugmark census method was invalid because it depended on the identification of individual tigers from their foot-prints, an experiment was conducted in a zoo to check for its validity: 33 pugmarks tracings were obtained on 2 different substrates from 4 captive tigers, and 6 wildlife managers, who were claimed to have 4 to 12 years of tiger census experience, were asked to give their census figures.

The participants made 72% statistically significant correct choices in distinguishing the pugmark impressions of left and right, front and hind feet, and of male and female tigers. But the participant with 12 years of tiger census experience declined to identify the tigers. The rest of the 5 participants could not identify a single tiger from the pugmarks, and their figures ranged between 6 and 24.

Based on the above, the Review concluded that the field methodology was unreliable. (Karanth, 1987).

Revisiting the Controversy

(1) Basic premises used for the experiment for validity of Field Censuses

Certain premises made in the text of the review were not based on literature research. Some of these erroneous statements in the review related to the field method developed by S. R. Choudhury which was used in the 1972 and 1979 tiger censuses in India:

(a) S.R. Choudhury had argued that every tiger could be individually identified from its pugmarks.

Facts in literature: S. R. Choudhury had cautioned against identifying tigers from their pugmarks. (Choudhury, 1972a). His used Co-operation Census Technique and not the pugmark census technique.

(b) The investigator asserted there was no validation carried out of the field method.

Facts in literature: The literature shows that the Co-operation Census Technique was validated by S.R. CHOUDHURY by carrying out field trials in tiger habitats in Orissa and Uttar Pradesh, and control trials in Delhi Zoo and Nandankanan Biological Park in 1970 and 1971; (Choudhury, 1970b, 1971).

(c) The investigator treated two different methods as one and the same ‘Pugmark Technique’:

Facts in literature: S.R. Choudhury’s Co-operation Tiger Census method (Choudhury, 1970a, 1970b. 1971, 1972a, 1979b) and Pugmark method (Panwar, 1979a) were two different techniques, as reflected from the protocols used for arriving at the estimates for tiger populations:

Co-operation Census Technique estimated the approximate size of tiger population in an area by converting field data to the territorial occupancy of tiger populations (Choudhury, 1970b), while the Pugmark Census technique used tiger pugmarks as the primary index for identifying individual tigers for estimating their populations in an area (Panwar, 1979a). The field data collected and the protocols for analysis of the field data were different in both cases, the only commonality was pugmarks traced by using a tiger tracer developed by Choudhury for his technique.

(2) Errors in the Evaluation of the Census Data of 1972 and 1984

i. Erroneous Bench Mark

a. In the census of 1972 tiger census could not be completed in 4/5th of Sunderbans in West Bengal; the Manas tiger reserve in Assam; the Simlipal tiger reserve in Orissa; and in north-eastern India (Srivastava, 1979).

b. After 1972 areas had been added to some tiger reserves (Panwar, 1979b). The numbers of tigers that happened to get added were not adjusted for calculation of densities and biomass to the earlier figure of 1972 for tiger reserves.

c. The 1984 census neither followed S.R. Choudhury’s method, nor did it have missing tigers in the estimate.

The use of 1972 census figures as a bench mark for calculation of growth rates from the complete census figures of 1984 was unscientific.

ii. Error in application of values of population parameters as a standard for ecologically different tiger habitats:

a. The comparison of densities and biomass using values from limited research carried out in ecologically different tiger conservation units was not scientifically valid because of the systemic differences in different landscapes and bio-geographical zones and biomes in other tiger habitats.

b. Cattle biomass is an indeterminate and significant addition to the prey base of tigers. Contrary to the assertion made in the review, that all cattle-kills are reported in India because compensation is paid for them, the facts are different. The carcasses of cattle killed are often not available to establish the claim for compensation, and quite a good number of kills miss getting recorded in the books.

c. The wide variation in tiger densities and tiger biomass shown in the census results of 1984 in India cannot simply be explained away by supposed difference in protection standards or errors in census methodology, without eliminating the effect of managed inputs in ecological productivity of resources and habitats affecting the growth of tigers.

d. Historical records also do not support the assumed rigor of densities a good habitat can attain. Tiger hunting bags recorded by different hunters, and tiger count by Maharaja of Bundi (Sankhala, 1978) indicate existence of higher tiger densities than those adopted from the research in a few other areas.

iii. Error in the Logic of the Analysis:

There was no logic in leading to a conclusion that census methodology was at fault because 6 out of 18 tiger reserves (33%) exceeded the presumed limits of tiger density and biomass, ignoring the 12 reserves where these were well within the stipulated limits.

(3) Errors in the experiment in the zoo:

i. Flaws in the concept and design of the experiment:

a. The design of the experiment did not simulate either the Co-operation Tiger method or the ‘Pugmark Census’ Technique. Co-operation technique used a network of impression pads to provide a single type of standard surface for tracing pugmarks. The experiment by design presented pugmarks from two non-standard surfaces for testing the participants and made a conclusion about the methodology.

b. The alleged length of experience of the participants was not established. In practice, Project Tiger organized tiger census once in four years at National level and once in two years at State level. Any participant to have acquired experience of 4 to 6 censuses would have had to spend a minimum of 7 to 11 years on postings in tiger conservation units. Similarly, for the experience of 12 years of census experience the said participant would need to spend 23-24 years on such posting(s). Such tenures are not allowed to an officer by the government. The reported length of experience with tiger census was not established beyond doubt. Some of the participants may have had tiger census experience on only one or two occasions!

ii. Flaws in the conduct of the experiment

a. The experiment asked the participants to identify tigers from a single parameter: the tiger pugmark. It offered inadequate data to the participants. The missing parameters were: location from where pugmarks were collected, the average stride and straddle of the tiger, and the placement of the tigers’ pugmarks with respect to the direction of their movement used in field census’ techniques for elimination of duplication in counting tigers.

b. In the experiment a serious anomaly was visible: if 70% of the participants had made statistically significant correct choices in distinguishing the sex and the pugmarks of tigers, but they had completely failed in identification of individual tigers and tiger counts, there was an imperative need to further investigate into the source of anomaly.

c. Scientific research protocol also demanded replication of experiment with different sets of participants since tiger census was being practiced in other States, too. It would have eliminated any chance of the participants having been exposed to a non-standard method.

But no replications of the experiment were carried out – the interpretation of results was made from a single sample survey.

(4) Evaluation of the Conclusion Derived in the Review

With defective bench-mark, lack of simulation of the field methodologies, inherent flaws in the design and conducting of the experiment, and only single sample survey, the only interpretations one can scientifically arrive at are:

     1) That it is difficult to count tigers from only one parameter: pugmarks taken from two soil substrates; and

     2) That the shortfall in the skills exhibited by participants in a single trial cannot be treated as the defect in the methodologies.

Pugmarks are a reliable tiger monitoring index – can be used in estimation of tiger populations and research – Other Views:

a. The Wildlife Institute of India tested the statements made in the follow-up of the Critical Review of Field Censuses by the investigator. These were:

(a) the pugmarks are not unique to individual tigers;

(b) they cannot be used for census, but can be used for estimates;

(c) census is subjective and number game;

(d) the census method is not validated quantitatively on wild tigers;

(e) and the field method is vulnerable to extraneous factors (Karanth, 2003).

b. The findings by the Wildlife Institute of India conclusively disproved all these contentions in 2005 (Sharma et al, 2001, 2005).

(a) Their study established that the pugmarks are unique to individual tigers;

(b) pugmarks can be used for population estimation of tigers;

(c) 63% of the Indian experts were 100% accurate in identifying tigers from their pugmarks;

(d) pugmarks census technique had 100% classification accuracy in DFA & Logistic Regression models using only two variables - Length & Width of pugmarks; and that

(e) the use of protocols can help in avoiding influence of extraneous factors (Sharma et al, 2001, 2005).

c. A tiger pugmark-identity correlation field test was carried out by the scientists of the Smithsonian Tiger Conservation Project in Chitwan tiger habitat in Nepal. It involved identification of tigers from their tracks and verifying their identity from photographs of tigers. The team established the validity of pugmark identification in 1996, and extensively used data from tracks in their research work for over 15 years. (Smith et al, 1999).

d. Historically, if pugmarks could not identify individual tigers and leopards, how is it that Jim Corbett did not overkill tigers and leopards in his pursuit of man-eaters, at a time when for every tiger and leopard in India today there were many times more in his times to choose from?

Monitoring Tigers in the Twenty-First Century

The rejection of field methods for estimating the tiger populations was not based on any scientific experiment. There is science in the field methods, too. The reliability of pugmarks as an index for tiger count was questioned and answered over the past two decades. The statistical estimation approaches have also been tried out. The use of statistical modeling approaches in wildlife conservation also can not be ignored. Both the field methods and statistical models are vulnerable to human bias.

Systems Analysis and Ecological Modeling can become a significant component of wildlife management only if the results are verifiable and useful for the user. The problem lies in the lack of appreciation about when and where to use which approach. Blind promotion or rejection of any approach may have an adverse effect on tiger conservation.

It is not the academic excellence but the field staff that will save the tiger. The need of the day is to enable the field level manpower to monitor tigers with user-friendly methods and techniques. The right way(s) to monitor tiger populations and habitats in the 21st century will be the one(s) that ensure the tiger is benefited from our efforts. A fresh look at both the academic and the field approaches is needed. There is no harm in trying to REINVENT OR REPAIR THE WHEEL IF THE EXISTING ONE DOES NOT WORK.

References

(A list of 51 references given in the unabridged paper.)

***

Running For Life - A Leopard's Tale

Fire in My Backyard Forest



Shafts of golden sunlight lit the green vault of sal forest behind my house. Summer was at its peak, and sal trees had been shedding their leaves. The forest floor wore a yellow-brown carpet of dried leaves. Through it snaked a vague deer path. Wary of making noise, I advanced, treading softly on the path. My ears caught faintest of the jungle sounds – the buzzing flight of a bee, the scrape of a lizard’s claws, and the faraway flutter of wings. Even more than my ears and eyes, I was alive to the spirit of the forest – I could feel the forest.

Suddenly, through the corner of my eye, I saw a small patch in the pattern of shade and light on the ground, fifty feet to my left, ruffle for a moment. I thought I might have imagined it, but I wanted to be sure; for one must not ignore small messages and little signs the forest gives to the one who wants to be there. I froze. I did not turn my head for a better look, waiting for it to happen again.

Moments, stretched out like minutes, beat past my heart. It happened again; a spot of light in the dappled leaf bed twitched. I slowly turned my head to have a better look. There she was: a leopard suckling her two cubs as she lay on her side with her back toward me. I could see her through the thin screen of a lantana bush in which she lay. Filtered down through the green canopy of leaves the rays of sun etched out her youthful form with a golden sheen. Her flank rose and fell rhythmically as she slowly drew in and let her breath out. The heads of her two cubs were just visible over the curve of her body. It was the little white spot at the end of her long tail that had caught my eye as she twitched the tip of her tail in contentment.

A wave of fear and surprise shook me. I did not expect this part of the forest to be inhabited by a leopard; there wasn’t enough prey in it to sustain a leopard. People had killed and eaten away most of the wild animals that a leopard hunts for food.

But there they were: a mother and her two cubs. I know a mother can fearlessly face any threat to her children; and here was a mother armed with razor sharp claws and dagger-like fangs. I feared that she would resent my intrusion. It is different when you watch a leopard in a zoo. You watch it from the safety of a viewers’ gallery. But if alone and unarmed you meet her on her ground with nothing to stop her charge, you do not want to catch the attention of a loving and caring mother leopard with her cubs. Pound for pound, a leopard is said to be the strongest of the big cats of the world. You would rather enjoy the sight of a beautiful spotted big cat playing with her cuddlesome babies in a zoo.

One of the cubs happened to peer over the reclining body of his mother. Its eyes locked on me. I might have made some movement that had caught his eye. It stopped feeding. The mother stood up and turned a reproachful eye toward me. For a fleeting moment she drew her ears back, flat against her head; and cast an appraising glance at me. Her mouth slightly ajar, a faint growl came out of it; but her eyes said she was not alarmed. Without wasting another look at me, she turned and led her cubs away from me; deeper into the lantana thickets, and was out of my sight.

I turned back; elated and content at the beautiful sight I had just witnessed in the forest behind my house. I felt I should take a chance to see them again early next morning.

But I did not get my chance. It had been one of the hottest and driest summers to have struck the forest in recent years. The forest was tinder dry. The hot day waned and sun shimmered down the western horizon. In the thickening dusk, tongues of fire leapt up the bank of a nullah, half a mile to the west of where I had seen the leopard family. Someone had set fire to the forest. The evening breeze fanned it; and it quickly gained in strength. In no time at all, the entire forest was on fire. Flames leapt high up into the leafy branches of the tall sal trees. Sparks flew, and bursts of crackling and exploding sounds of twigs and branches filled the air as they caught fire. The forest turned into a red and yellow wall of angry flames. Dark crying silhouettes of the dislodged and frightened roosting birds flitted across the wall of fire. Over the myriad sounds came the death cries of unseen dwellers of the forest.

The fire reached the edge of the forest. Crops were ready for the harvest. We rushed in to beat the fire out. A Forest Patrol arrived from the nearby Range Headquarters and tried to control the fire. But the blaze could not be contained. All that could be achieved was to check its advance at the narrow road that separated the fire from the crops.

The following day saw the forest smoldering in silence; thin wisps and ribbons of smoke arose from among the ashes and the burnt tangle of bushes that had covered the ground a day ago.

It was a heart-rending sight. Scorched skeletons of tall trees stood mourning their dead friends and young ones. In the deathly stillness of the forest, the charred bones and ribs of a small deer stood out parched white against the fire-blackened ground. The forest, which was alive with life and sound a day before, was sad. That evening I was told fire had killed more than a dozen monkeys, half a dozen peacocks, and many other birds that were roosting in the trees near the road. I wondered if the leopard family had also been killed in the fire. The thought was very depressing.

Two days later, a leopard was seen near a village a mile away from the burnt forest. The report in the news paper said people were in panic; the leopard had let loose a reign of terror; and no one ventured out after dusk. To me the lines seemed to be straight out of Jim Corbett’s ‘Man-eating Leopard of Rudrapryag’; the tale of a leopard that operated a hundred years ago, in an area four hours of drive from Dehradun. I visited the village, for it was not far from my house. People were amused: where else would a leopard live, if not in the forest? They asked. The leopard had caused them no harm. I did not find them in panic; they were used to the presence of wild animals in their neighborhood.

That night this patch of forest also was burnt down. The fire had caused extensive damage to the forest. A few days later, there was yet another sighting of a leopard; this time it was four miles away from the spot where a leopard had been last reported. As before, the report described people living in panic and suffering from the reign of terror caused by the leopard in the area. Once again the forest was burnt.

Then all of a sudden leopard sightings stopped; peace returned. But it was a lull before the storm. The world famous Wildlife Institute of India is just half a mile from my house. The land on which it stands was once a forest, linked with the forest behind my house. Over the years, the links were severed; clusters of houses mushroomed in the spaces along the edge of the forest. A high wall around the Institute now protects a small patch of forest on its estate. A small spring-fed stream flows in it through tall wild grasses, shrubs and trees. It is as a safe heaven for many wild animals of the erstwhile forest; monkeys, hares, jackals, peafowl, jungle fowl, partridges, snakes, tortoises, mongooses live in it; leopards are known to visit it, but they do not stay for long. The beleaguered leopardess arrived with her two cubs, and decided to stay in it for the time being.

The forest she had taken shelter in did not have enough prey in it to feed her family. She started picking up stray dogs and small animals at night from the villages around. One day a dog killed by her was found snagged on the sharp hooks of the boundary wall by the workers in the Institute. It made her presence on the campus known to everyone in the Institute. Now everyone was on the lookout for the leopard. It was not long before she was sighted by the people. She was seen accompanied with her two cubs in the forest behind the students’ hostel.

Safety of human life was a hot topic for discussion; but there was a difference. The discussions did not stop at human safety concerns; the protection for the leopard and her cubs also was a part of concern of the human minds. Opinions were split over how to deal with a leopard mother and her cubs. Some argued her presence was a normal event; for leopards had been seen on the campus even on earlier occasions. She would shift out in due course of time, they held. Others feared human backlash if any one was attacked or injured by the mother in defense of her cubs. They favored capture of the leopards and their release in a far-off forest.

Some workers on the campus tried to drive them away early one morning; and a boy was mauled by the leopard on the campus of the Institute. The news of the leopards living in their midst was unwelcome; nobody wished leopards to live near them. If the Director did not take any action and let people take the matter in their hands, the fate of the leopards was sealed. He decided to take the help of the forest department. Traps were set up at the leopards’ favorite haunts. The dense undergrowth of bushes was cleared for better safety of human life. But all efforts came to a futile end.

Providence intervened, and a light, pre-monsoon rain fell; the parched forest lapped up the rain drops thirstily. Sap rose in the dry grass-blades and comatose stems of bushes. Fresh green buds burst out on skeletal plants; the sparse tangles of lantana bushes became dense. The forest became a better place for the wild animals. The cubs had grown up, and were more mobile now. When the people in the Institute tried to drive away the leopards, they moved back to the forest where I had seen them earlier.

But they could not stay there: the prey was missing. The leopards moved on to an unknown part of the forest.

The mother was still on the run for life – hers as well as of her cubs’. Whether the mother found a safe heaven for her cubs or not, I do not know. But she left behind some questions for us to answer.

The fire that made the mother leopard with cubs run for her life and the life of her family was not a natural fire. There had been no thunder storm, or high wind that could have produced fire in the forest. A carelessly thrown butt of cigarette or bidi would have started fire, but at one point. The fire appeared all of a sudden as a long row of flickering flames. Someone had set forest on fire. The first question was: Who set her forest on fire, and why?

I did not know who they were, and why they did so. So, I tried to find the answer to her question. On the land abutting the forest the crops were nearing harvest time. No one would run the risk of wind blowing the fire into their standing crops. Young boys in my village had come out of their own to the help the forest department put out the raging fire. They could not have been the ones to set fire to the forest. Who else would commit such a horrific act?

A tall, slim, middle-aged man had hurriedly walked out of the forest just after the fire appeared on the rim of the nullah. He caught my attention because he was wearing a full sleeved striped shirt and a dirty white pyjama, a dress not worn by the local villagers. I thought he might have seen the leopard while collecting firewood and I did not pay him much attention. Was he the one who had set fire to the forest?

People in my village let their cattle loose to pasture in the grassy blanks in the forest. They also fetched back firewood and fodder from the forest for use at home. There were others around who had an innate dread of the jungle. For them it was a place for the spirits and the ferocious animals. Most of them never entered the forest, for they were not dependent on the forest for their livelihoods.

Yet there were those who did not live near the forest; but they regularly entered the forest. Small groups of old men and women went into the forest early in the morning, carrying sickles and axes and cords with them; where they cut up fallen trees and made bundles of firewood for sale in the town. All day they streamed out of the forest, carrying head-loads of firewood to the near by bakeries and low price tea and food stalls that line the road to Dehradun. They spent time in the forest and were not afraid of the wild animals. And they knew how to meet their livelihood needs.

During the rainy season old rotten branches fall to the ground; swollen watercourses bring down trees grown on their banks. There is ample supply of dead, dry and fallen firewood on the ground in the forest. But it soon declines as it is taken out and sold in the market. The axe seeks logs and the stumps of trees, which are converted into splits of firewood and sold in the town. But it, too, does not last long. The forest grows a new generation of trees and shrubs every year; the firewood cutters know how to convert them into firewood. They remove the bark of trees and young saplings, and leave them standing to die. Soon these are dry and ready for removal as dead wood. Naturally dead and fallen firewood is crooked in form, and varies in thickness and length; but very long and straight firewood comes from the young trees that were cut and left to dry in the forest. Each head load of eight to ten feet long sticks is made of fifteen to twenty future trees. With the advance of summer this supply, too, dwindles out. By the time summer advances to its peak the forest is exhausted of all dead and dry firewood. Forest is then set on fire to quickly dry out the green bushes and take out their thin branches for sale in the market.

This is also the time when the young of wild animals are at their most vulnerable age. Most of the wild animals bring their young into this world just before nature produces food for them; which is when spring meets summer. This is the time when mothers are bringing up their little ones. Peacocks, jungle fowl, partridges, pheasants, deer, wild boar, bears, leopards, tigers, and all other animals that live on the ground or in the trees are with their young. Fire displaces them, kills them, and destroys their food and shelters. Survivors try to seek shelter in less disturbed cover, and sometimes come close to the edge of the forests.

The woodcutters had set the forest on fire, only for earning their daily bread. These people are the poorest of the poor; but they are absolutely unconcerned about the death of animals in the forest; and they could not care less what happened to a mother and her babies. Poverty and hunger can not promote soft sentiments for wildlife in their minds; they have to face a harsh and ruthless world of human beings.

Food, space, mates and security are the basic needs of life; people as well as wild animals value them. No one is rich or poor in the jungle. Health means Life; Life feeds on Death; Death begets Life. There is no place for senseless killings in the Law of the Jungle. The deer knows when a tiger is satiated and will not attack it. There is no place in it for jealousy, ego, greed or anarchy.

The leopardess was forced to leave every forest where she had tried to take shelter. It was summer when the fire in the forest forced the mother leopard to shift her cubs and exposed her to the people. She did not try to come near human habitation during the rainy season or the winter months. She did not harm anyone, why did people become her enemies? Didn’t she have a right to raise her young ones in her natural home? The forest where she lived seemed to echo her questions. Who will answer mother leopard’s unanswered questions?

I struggled to answer the question; but could not. All I could think of was that we are too far removed from the ethics of life. Everyone of us – the professional forester, the media, the politician, the town planner, the local householder – has to revisit our notions about man and wildlife and work together in an enlightened manner. Otherwise, like the tiger, the leopard is also heading towards extinction, and we are jointly responsible for it.

    Sunderban Tiger Reserve is a part of the Sunderban delta mass in South 24 Pargana district of West Bengal. It is land-locked and tidal channels divide the entire tiger reserve into small and big islands. The green part is the forest area outside the tiger reserve and is known as the 24 Pargana Forest Division. The pink shaded area is Sajnekhali Sancturary, the blue part is the Sunderban National Park, and the rest of the islands between the sanctuary and the national park and east of the sanctuary together form the tiger reserve. The tiger reserve together with the 24 Pargana Forest Division and villages along their fringes form Sunderban Biosphere Reserve. Sunderban is a World Heritage Site.

Sunderban - The Mangrove Tigerland

Sunderban Tiger Reserve is a 2,585 sq km of carpet of mangrove forest, with tidal channels cutting it up into numerous islands. There are no human habitation, roads, or railway network in this expanse of world's unique tigerland. The Bay of Bengal is about 80 km south from its northern edge, which is a channel that separates the forest from human habitation of the district of South 24 Parganas in West Bengal

Jogi Mahal - as it was then

Just below the fort of Ranthambhor, inside Sawai Madhopur Wildlife Sanctuary (Now Ranthambhor National Park and Tiger Reserve) I stayed a week in the now famous Rest House. I was working on my dissertation titled "Bio-aesthetic Planning of National Parks and Wild Life Sanctuaries with a special reference to the Sawai Madhopur Wild Life Sanctuary". My guide was the legendary Late Saroj Raj Choudhary, the father of Wildlife Management Training in India. It was he who had trained remarkable people like H.S. Panwar and Fateh Singh Rathore and others well known in this field for their contributions. Jogi Mahal has undergone some changes, and so has the wildlife area surrounding it.