Report of the Tiger Task Force - PRS

■ JOINING THE DOTS TIGER TASK FORCE REPORT3.1 The institutional agendaProject Tiger is a centrally sponsored scheme inwhich the states provide matching grants to pay forrecurring items of expenditure, such as maintenanceof habitat, creation of temporary water facilities, etc.The Union ministry of environment and forests hasthe mandate to provide technical guidance andfunding support; it is also responsible for overallcoordination, monitoring and evaluation of theproject, apart from helping states in estimatingnumbers of tigers and other wildlife.Following the 42 nd amendment to the IndianConstitution in 1976, the subject of forests andwildlife was transferred from the State List to theConcurrent List. With this, the Central governmentacquired overriding powers to ensure protection andpreservation of forests and wildlife.By the 1990s, the problems between Project Tigerand the states had begun. It was pointed out time andagain that states were lagging behind in disbursingproject funds they received, staff vacancies were notbeing filled, the monitoring of protection work wasweak and that wildlife crime enforcement lacked teeth.In 2000, the Supreme Court, acting on a publicinterest litigation (Public Interest Litigation writnumber 1474/1998), directed the secretary, Unionministry of environment and forests, to convene ameeting of chief secretaries of tiger habitat states toevolve a joint strategy for protection of the tiger. Thefollowing results of deliberations that ensued with thestates were listed in an affidavit the secretary filed: 1a. There is a shortage of resources in states, whichleads to delayed disbursal of funds, non-paymentof staff salaries for up to six months, and even alack of funds to pay for fuel for vehicles.b. Because of the delay in disbursing Centralassistance to tiger reserves by state governments,earmarked activities are not completed and fundsremain unutilised. The Centre, therefore, withholdsthe next instalment. This leads to a situation whereon one hand, Central outlays for wildlifeconservation increase progressively, but on theother, funds lapse because of non-utilisation.c. There are vacancies of staff at the field level — insome states, more than 30 per cent of the posts offorest guards and foresters remain unfilled. Mostof the existing field staff is ill-equipped, overageand inadequately trained.d. More than 30 per cent of the tiger population anda substantial number of other wildlife are foundoutside the protected area network, but forestersdo not consider conservation of this wildlifeamong their top priorities.e. There is a need to ensure timely compensationfor livestock killed by wildlife, for without thisthe conflict between humans and animals willintensify.The affidavit also listed some solutions, which wereaccepted by the Supreme Court. These were:1. New mechanisms would be introduced tosolve the problem of delay in disbursement. Thechief secretaries of the key problem states —Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh,Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Orissa — agreed thatCentral funds for wildlife conservation should bedirectly released to entities created for this purpose.2. Central funds would reach implementingagencies within six weeks of the time of receiptand the state government would prioritiseallocations for wildlife under their state plans.3. The state governments agreed to fill up existingvacancies on a priority basis. Madhya Pradesh,which had decided to abolish vacant posts, agreedto exempt the posts of forest guards and forestersfrom downsizing. Maharashtra and Orissa agreedto fill all vacancies within six months, whileKarnataka said every effort would be made to fillup to 200 vacancies of forest guards within oneyear. Assam and Arunachal said that in view offinancial constraints, they would transfer stafffrom sectors with a lower priority.4. The amount of compensation to be paid has beenrevised by the Centre, and the state governmentswill now pay the amount expeditiously.5. State governments will strengthen the existingprotection mechanism. The states alsosuggested that they would look at the feasibility ofrecruitment and training of forest guards throughpolice agencies. The Union ministry ofenvironment and forests reported that it hadalready requested the Central Industrial SecurityForce to train foresters in insurgency-pronereserves. It was also agreed that the staff would begiven the authority to confiscate vehicles, armsand other articles used for wildlife offences.6. It was agreed to provide incentives to forestpersonnel living in remote areas. The Unionministry of environment and forests wouldevolve transparent guidelines dealing with thetransfers and posting of officials in wildlifeareas, as well as a suitable human resourcedevelopment policy.28 The way ahead