Mudumalai Tiger Reserve: Mudumulai,
in the misty Nilgiri Hills to the extreme west of Tamil Nadu and
neighbouring the national parks in Bandipur (Karnataka) and Wayanad
(Kerala), is part of a thickly wooded region that is celebrated by
travel guides and wildlife enthusiasts as the “sanctuary of the south”.
Wildlife ranging from macaques and langurs to sloth bears and sambhar
deer, elephants, leopards, civets and tigers thrives in Mudumulai,
whose name translates as the ancient hills.
t is also home—and a source of livelihood—for 377 mainly tribal
families, or 1,538 people, spread across 30 settlements. And it is a
focal point of the country’s latest man-animal conflict, pitting land
and resource rights of forest dwellers against the cause of wildlife
conservation.
One day in July, more than 1,000 people joined a hunger strike to
protest the declaration of Mudumulai as “critical tiger habitat” by the
ministry of environment and forests that forbade human habitation in
the area. They were also protesting a ban on the collection of forest
produce including firewood, a ban on grazing and night restrictions on
vehicular traffic clamped as part of the declaration.
Also Read
M. Ganeshamurthy, a shy tribesman in his early 20s, didn’t need much
persuasion to travel more than 500km by bus to join the protest.
Ganeshamurthy sympathizes with the cause of the Mudumulai people
because he is a resident of Kalakkad-Munduthurai Tiger Reserve, a
declared critical tiger habitat and where, too, forest dwellers face
the threat of eviction.
“We are tied to this land,” he said. “Every time we go down to the
plains, our first thoughts go back to the village.”
The two reserves are among 36 wildlife parks nationwide that have been
designated critical tiger habitat, requiring people dwelling in the
forests and their vicinity to move out.
JUNGLE TRAIL (Graphic)
There are about 1,500 villages
populated by 65,000 families, or 325,000 people, in the so-called core
and buffer areas of these parks, which are also home to 1,411 of the
big cats, according to the latest tiger census and the Tiger Task Force
report-2005.
Mudumulai itself is populated by 38 tigers, according to the forest
department. Buxa Tiger Reserve in West Bengal and Satpura Tiger Reserve
in Madhya Pradesh have also seen tribal protests in recent months
against the parks being declared critical tiger
habitat.
“In a country like India, this is a dilemma,” Karanth says. “We
have semi-natural ecosystems, which cover about 10% of India’s land,
and 4% is under protected areas. We have passed the point of squeezing
this further. If the problems of a billion people have not been solved
with 96% of the land then the remaining 4% cannot save them.”
Root of the conflict
The current conflict is, ironically, rooted in a 2006 law that sought
to confer on forest dwellers and tribal communities rights to land and
forest resources they had lived off for generations; such rights had
not been recognized in any land record since independence.
Conservationists and the ministry of environment and forests had warned
that the Scheduled Tribes and Traditional Forest Dwellers Act, or
forest rights Act, whose rules were notified in December last year, and
which is now in the implementation phase, would be bogged down exactly
where it is at risk of getting mired— in the national parks and
wildlife sanctuaries.
The rules of the Act were notified in early 2008. Opponents of the Act
have argued that it will lead to massive forest destruction.
The ministry of environment and forests had the Wildlife Protection
Act, 1972, amended in December 2006 to try and keep at least the tiger
reserves out of the purview of the Forest Rights Act. Tiger parks until
then didn’t have any legal status; they were merely an area designated
to benefit from funds allocated to Project Tiger, which was launched in
the early 1970s to protect the tiger from ruthless poaching that had
led its population to fall.
The amendment gave legal backing to the idea of tiger reserves as a
critical habitat and later executive orders ensured that such areas
would be made inviolate and people living there relocated. Two
officials from the ministry of environment and forests declined to
comment on the matter, citing its “sensitive nature.”
Villagers say the critical tiger habitats were notified in great haste,
just two days before the rules of the Forest Rights Act were published.
And although the so-called core regions of critical tiger habitat need
to be free of human presence, the rules require gram sabhas, or village
councils, to be informed about the scientific basis for declaring the
areas inviolate. Regardless of any relocation, forest dwellers’ rights
to land and other resources have to be signed off by a district-level
committee. These rules were overlooked, according to the villagers.
Rules bypassed
“We were just sent a notice and told. No gram sabhas were called nor
any discussion held, nor have any rights been settled,” said D. Rajan,
of Moyar village in Mudumulai tiger reserve.
The forest department admits that some provisions have been overlooked.
“The processes in the sequence have not been followed. We are currently
in the process of obtaining gram sabha agreements,” said Rajiv K.
Srivastava, field director of Mudumulai Tiger Reserve.
Tiger scientist Ulhas Karanth says that for the survival of the tiger,
whose diminishing numbers have been a cause of mounting concern among
conservationists and policymakers, it is vital to keep the animal’s
habitat
inviolate.
Rajan and 3,000 other residents of the village are at the risk of
losing water and grazing rights. According to the critical tiger
habitat guidelines, no non-forestry activity will be tolerated in the
core zone, but habitation and limited usage of the buffer zone around
the core will be allowed. Though Moyar villagers retain their houses,
the grazing lands for their cattle and water resources are inside the
core zone.
The collection and sale of cow dung, used as fuel and fertilizer, was
one way villagers earned a living. That has stopped with the
establishment of more check-points, which do not allow them to take it
out. Villagers have also been banned from using mud, stones and grass
from the parks that they need to strengthen their huts.
The Chettys
The Moundadan Chettys, whose habitation in the Nilgiris (a part of it
is in Mudumalai Tiger Reserve) dates back ages, complain that they have
been isolated in their own land, cut off from the outside world and
left with no access to basic services since the area was declared a
wildlife sanctuary 68 years ago. There are 260 Chetty families in the
sanctuary area.
Chain gates erected at the entrance of villages restrict the movement
of residents and there are no roads, electricity, health services,
educational institutes and communication facilities, says C.R.
Krishnan, adviser to the Nilgiri district Moundadan Chetty Community
Association.
The Chettys went to court in 1998, petitioning that they be relocated
to Ayyangolli outside the protected area. The court, in a February 2007
order, said those willing to relocate may be rehabilitated in the area
with equal land and compensation for their houses and trees.
“These people have no other option but to move out and let go of
centuries of history and belonging,” said Krishnan.
The relocation for the Chettys has been approved and funds have already
been allocated. “Now the revenue department will ascertain the value of
the lands and give us the (rehabilitation) plan,” said Srivastava.
But where the Chettys find a sense of belonging, the forest department
sees a wildlife habitat.
“As I stood there, I imagined that once the villages were outside, how
the whole area would slowly become grassland, from the hills to the
plains,” said Srivastava.
http://www.livemint.com/2008/09/08232949/Ground-zero-of-the-fight-betwe.html
Copyright © 2007 HT Media