Report of the Tiger Task Force - PRS

■ JOINING THE DOTS TIGER TASK FORCE REPORTof the research, saying it must be recognised thatthe product of any wildlife research in terms ofits scientific results and publications is theintellectual property of the researchers. Theagency or personnel managing the area in whichsuch research is permitted to be carried out willnot have the right to claim these research resultsor impose their names on the publications,without the express and voluntary permission ofthe researchers. Research permission should notimpose any conditions relating to the publicationof research results, as this would constitute aninfringement of the fundamental right ofacademic freedom of the researchers.h. The chief wildlife wardens and director(wildlife), government of India, must constitutetechnical panels comprising individualspecialists on various aspects of wildliferesearch, to assist them in reviewing scientificwildlife research proposals. All studiesinvolving destructive or manipulative research,and, those studies whose quality ormethodologies the chief wildlife warden isunsure about prima facie, must be referred tothese technical review panels. Proposalssubmitted by qualified scientists can be rejectedonly after reference to the technical panel.i. Wildlife researchers engaged in bona fideresearch shall inform the managing authorities ofthe area of any fact or observation relevant towildlife conservation, including violation oflaws, occurring in the area. However, theyshould not interfere in the normal day to dayadministration of the area nor can they escort oraccompany unauthorised personnel into thearea. 3Research to guide managementA broad-based framework, inclusive of managementand human aspects of conservation, is theprerequisite for wildlife research. A major objectionthat field managers raise is that a lot of today’swildlife research addresses only animals and nothabitats or plant ecology. There are very few studiesthat look at interface conflicts and the way out. Thereis no experimental research with respect to habitats,except by managers. This is one of the reasons formanagers to be somewhat indifferent to animalbiology research — and that too, about the morecharismatic species.The issue of prioritising research has beenconsidered in depth at the Wildlife Institute of India.In 2001, the Training Research and AcademicCouncil of the Institute nominated a sub-group toconsider a research agenda. The report of the subgroupemphasised a “landscape approach”. Theconsensus was that the complexity and seriousnessof the problems at hand could not be addressed inthe limited scale of a single protected area. The ideawas to upscale field conservation to the landscapelevel, in a manner inclusive of the concerns of localpeople and with their participation.The conservation of the tiger and most otherspecies of flora and fauna faces the typical ‘sourceand sink’ situation with respect to the protected areaand its surrounding. It is, therefore, necessary to firstidentify some landscapes in the country whichrequired priority because of their relativebiodiversity significance and the magnitude ofproblems. The next stage is to do baselines onbiological, management and socio-economicattributes and issues in an interdisciplinary manner.Once this stage is through, depending upon theseverity of the problems, research topics could beidentified in the respective ecological-biological,management and human aspects of conservation andof the welfare of local people. Such a framework is auseful tool to prioritise basic, applied andexperimental research, and can assist in generatinginformation useful to management.If anything, tiger conservation needs such aframework urgently. The tiger’s long-term survivaldepends on it. Even if we prioritise initialmanagement to target protected areas and theirimmediate ‘mutual impact zones’, it is imperative tolook beyond to the physical and social landscape.The 1983 task force under Madhavrao Scindia hadalso seen the management imperatives along theselines, but neither the management nor the researchwhich came after, followed the roadmap proposedby the task force. The result is here for us to see.All research definitely contributes to a betterunderstanding, but only a few can be of effective helpin solving problems. It is this link that must bestrengthened.This also points to the importance of prioritisingresearch and the need for interdisciplinary research.Wildlife research is needed in three disciplinary andresearch activity domains — basic, applied andexperimental.Facilitating networkingIt is clear that while all research is important and canassist in building knowledge-based actions, what isneeded is a coordinating mechanism to allownetworking between researchers and park managers.This forum would facilitate identification ofpriorities, strengthen the exchange of informationand build a strong community of researchers. Oneinstitution which can play this role is the WildlifeInstitute of India, which was set up to undertakeresearch and training in wildlife science andmanagement. Since its inception in the 1980s, the82 The way ahead