Full page fax print - India Environment Portal

6.2 Are biological communities at a mix of ages and spacings that will support native biodiversity?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category* (Tick ü) Remarks
Biological communities unlikely to be able
The forest quality in most parts is excellent
Poor
to sustain native biodiversity.
but due to overgrazing in the past
Some biological communities likely to be
regeneration of important species is deficient
Fair ü
able to sustain native biodiversity.
and there is infestation of lantana and few
Most biological communities likely to be
other weeds. The tigers are said to be
Good
able to sustain native biodiversity.
breeding and so is the case with other
All biological communities likely to be able
carnivores and herbivores but with high
to sustain native biodiversity.
disturbance level the ratio is likely to be
Very good
affected. Bird populations look more
healthier.
6.3 Have the threats to the site being abated/ minimized?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category* (Tick ü) Remarks
Threats to the site have not abated but
The present DFO is very particular about
Poor
have enhanced.
minimizing of biotic pressures and has been
Some threats to the site have been abated. Fair
successful to some extent in some ranges
Most threats to the site have been abated. Good ü with the support of ACF and RFO. Illicit filling
All threats to the site have been abated.
of timber species is a constant threat which
has been checked to a great extent by the
present DFO. The head load lifting of
Very good
firewood continues and needs to be
checked. There has been a decline in
poaching cases also.
6.4 Are the expectations of visitors generally met or exceeded?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category* (Tick ü) Remarks
Expectations of visitors generally not met. Poor
There are only 1500-1600 visitors to the PA
Expectations of many visitors are met.
Fair
annually whose remarks in FRH registers
Expectations of most visitors are met. Good ü show that their expectations were generally
Good expectations of most visitors are met. Very good
met.
6.5 Are neighbours and adjacent communities supportive of PA management?
Assessment criteria
Condition Category (Tick ü) Remarks
Neighbours/adjacent communities are
The large number of villages on one side of
Poor ü
hostile.
PA have experienced horrifying menace of
Key neighbours/communities are
wolves during past 5 years and are not
Fair
supportive.
supportive of PA management in general.
Most neighbours/communities are
Their dependence on forest resources and
Good
supportive of PA management.
absence of alternatives also makes them
All neighbours and communities supportive
antagonistic when they are checked or
Very good
of PA management.
restricted to go to the forest.
*Score: Poor: 2.5; Fair: 5; Good: 7.5; Very Good: 10
Sohelwa Wildlife Sanctuary (Uttar Pradesh)
| 324