The gunning down of Avni is symptomatic of a crisis of governance and brings to the fore one of the most pressing problems of the human-animal conflict which demands professional solutions
Social activism is a sign of a vibrant, responsive and progressive society. Indian social activism has assumed gigantic proportions, but often, emotive activism, devoid of objectivity, derails the smooth functioning of institutions of governance and creates confusion. The latest in a series of such instances is the shooting of a man-eating Tigress in Maharashtra’s Yavatmal district. For the past few weeks, animal rights activists and organisations have been castigating the Maharashtra Government for the killing of Tigress Avni in Pandharkawada forests of Maharashtra’s Yavatmal district. They have charged the forest department for her cold-blodded killing, so much so that Union Minister Maneka Gandhi dubbed her killing as a straight case of crime and raised the hackle by demanding the sacking of Maharashtra Forest Minister Sudhir Mungantiwar.
The State Government on November 10 set up an inquiry committee to prove the death of the tigress. Let us examine the facts from the point of view of rule of law as also from the point of view of overall animal welfare, moral and professional ethos.
Tigress Avni was eliminated on the night of November 2, 2018, with help from a sharp shooter, Asgar Ali. During the last two years, the tigress killed 13 people. Due to public pressure, the Chief Wildlife Warden seemed to have ordered that the big cat be either captured or killed as she was found to be dangerous for human life. Even the Mumbai High Court, after initial refusal, allowed the shooting. The Supreme Court, however, refrained from interfering.
Strictly speaking, the forest department was within the legal boundaries to neutralise the man-eating tigress. Chapter III of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, deals with the subject of Hunting of Wild Animals and provisions of Chapter IV under Section 11(a) empower the Chief Wildlife Warden to order elimination of such animals.
Going by the rule book, foresters were within their right to have taken the decision to eliminate the man-eating tigress. However, going by the post-mortem and other reports, several questions arise that need to be answered. Further, the issue is not just about the killing of the tigress but involves larger issues of systemic malfunctioning of our social fibre and governance under which we are surely and certainly destroying the living space of the wildlife by fragmenting their corridors and encroaching on their habitats.
When results of our irrational behaviours are visible, like the killing of 13 people by Avni, and subsequently her elimination, the hue and cry being raised on her death is only emotionally targeting the forest department. There’s no discussion about the real causes that led to the situation, which is bound to rise in the near future.
Tiger conservation in India is an internationally acclaimed success story. Since tigers are a prolific breeder, conservation efforts are not going to be derailed by the unfortunate killing of Avni. However, the way this issue was handled and the manner in which she was killed does not absolve the foresters and other officials from criticism. They did handle the case in an unprofessional manner. The moot question here is: Why did the State Government, the district administration and the forest department not take proactive action when the first human killing was reported? The order of the Chief Wildlife Warden, too, needs to be examined. It needs to be ascertained whether the order was to tranquilise or to kill the tigress. If the order was to tranquilise, then why did the forest department lack the basic capacity to fire the dart gun? Why were they not able to train one of their staff? If it was a professional decision to kill her, due to management compulsions, were all protocols in the rule book followed?
According to the shooter, Ali, “We have been roaming in the forests for many days and after two forest guards identified the animal as T1, a forester fired the dart. But in a fraction of a second, she charged towards us with a roar. If I had not opened fire, she would have killed two to three people”. But the post mortem report, as reported in the media, said that the tigress was shot when she was facing away from the shooter and the dart found lodges in its left thigh and did not show any impact of being fired from a tranquilising gun. If this statement in the post mortem report is true (subject to verification), it contradicts the self-defence theory of the shooter and is a matter of suppression of facts. The Chief Wildlife Warden has to come clean on criticism.
It was a long pending correct decision to remove the tigress from this forest area. Only an efficient forest manager will be able to suggest if the elimination could have been well-planned and if the tigress could have been captured and sent to a zoo.
If it was a right decision to kill her, the Chief Wildlife Warden should make it clear as to what happened on the night of November 2 and what were the orders of the State Government. Honest professionals must face the public and clear the smoke.
The meat of the story, however, is: Tiger population in India has been steadily rising. In 2006, there were 1,411 tigers in the country, which increased to 2,226 in 2014. The 2018 census data is not yet out. Forest area in Yavatmal district is 19.9 per cent (2,606 sq km) of the geographic area (13,582 sq km), as per the Forest Survey of India’s ‘State of Forest Report 2017’. Though tigers are increasing, there has been a decrease of six sq km forest areas in Yavatmal district, compared to the assessment in 2015.
The State Government had been diverting forest lands in Yavatmal for the setting up of a cement factory and other projects without assessing its impact on wildlife. Though the tiger population is going up at an average of 30 per cent and conservation measures are bearing fruits, the forest area and the wildlife habitat are shrinking with the net result that young tigers are seeking territories in new fragmented forests, honeycombed by villages with little prey base. Tigress Avni and its two cubs were a victim of circumstances. There was shortage of food and no secure territory.
The killing of Avni has thrown a timely challenge for the foresters, State Governments and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change to seriously treat the disease of shrinking habitat and fragmentation of forest lands instead of treating the symptoms. They must pull up their socks and find professional solutions for such situations, especially on how to consolidate forest catchments for food and water security, fragmentation of forestlands in tiger and elephant corridors et al.
At the same time, foresters must upgrade their infrastructure and professional capability to meet such challenges, and show their spine in the same way the unsung foresters had shown. For their grit, determination and professional capability had led to tigers, other wild life and forest bio-diversity to survive in India in difficult situations. In the end, we must remember that notwithstanding perceived lapses on the part of authorities, which will be clear after a fair inquiry, the intention of governance was correct as we must also feel for 13 poor Indians who lost their lives. Now, the forest department must rehabilitate Avni’s two cubs.
(The writer is a Retired Civil Servant)
