A t a time when resettlement of people for conservation continues to be a contentious issue, a case study conducted amidst Gujjar families in Western Terai Arc tiger landscape has come out with an interesting finding.
The study found that while excessive extraction of natural resources was detrimental for biodiversity and conservation, but it was also the primary driver for resettlement. The desire for resettlement was also re-enforced by losses of livestock. While carnivores accounted for 25.1 per cent loss of livestock, 72.7 per cent death of cattle was due to disease, which went uncompensated.
The study has been conducted by experts from Wildlife Institute of India (WII) and international institutions including Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, School of Anthropology and Conservation, The University of Kent, UK.
According to Mousumi Ghosh-Harihar, from WII, the research was done on the basis of semi-structured questionnaire survey involving158 Gujjar households across a gradient of tiger occupancy area. Nearly 65 per cent of the population was below the international poverty threshold. “We found overwhelming preference for resettlement among this pastoralist community and hence an unexpected conservation opportunity,” she said. One hundred fifty six out of 158 households preferred resettlement outside forests to improve well-being.
The study observed that the main “push factors” identified for relocation were depletion of forest productivity and resources, due to their excessive extraction. It was found to be adversely affecting incomes and lack of access to education and health facilities. Simultaneously, declining forest resources is also a growing concern responsible affecting tiger habitats and prey base.
Gujjars being traditional herders, the livestock issue was another important factor that influenced relocation. Contrary to the notion, that loss of cattle was largely due to carnivores, the households blamed diseases to be the predominant reason for the loss of cattle. What was worse, that such cases went uncompensated by the forest department. However, there were positive experiences from previously resettled households, the study noted indicating an optimistic trend.
The researchers in the course of their survey found that demand for resettlement was uniformly strong regardless of local tiger occupancy. The preferences being governed by limited livelihoods, lack of access to basic amenities and not tigers. However, they suggested that funding for relocation should be prioritised for such households existing in high tiger occupancy areas. This is on account of higher livestock depredation and possibilities for man-animal conflicts.