 |
Alarm Over Tiger Data, Meet ShelvedUpdate: Response of the MOEF, together with Prerna Bindra's response. |
HOME1st May, 2006
The Editor Sir, Apropos the coverage "Alarm over tiger data, meet shelved" which appeared in the "Sunday Pioneer" of 30th April, 2006. In this context, I wish to clarify as follows: The countrywide methodology being followed in the current tiger estimation has been developed by a collaborative research project between Project Tiger and the Wildlife Institute of India. It involves sampling and estimation of tiger density at different strata using a combination of methods i.e. camera traps, digital photography of pugmarks to fix identities, on a statistical framework, and correlation with physical signs of tiger presence; prey base. etc. The methodology has been peer reviewed and accepted by the Tiger Task Force constituted by the Prime Minister. Panels of independent national as well as international experts have peer reviewed the process right from the stage of primary data collection in the field. Qualified data collectors have been specially trained and deployed with necessary equipments for collecting field data using camera traps/digital pugmark impressions. The process has three distinct phases, and so far only phase-l has been completed in the tiger States, and the data as received from States is being processed at the Wildlife Institute of India. The new methodology would yield data on tiger numbers only at the conclusion of Phase-III, which is expected to commence in September 2006, and which entails completion of the earlier two phases. Inference of data collected/validated in Phase I and II would be done by the Wildlife Institute of India during Phase III, which has not commenced. The methodology cannot yield even approximate numbers without completion of Phase III, and no estimates can be made by field level staff. The Protected Area managers or field officers of other tiger bearing forests are associated during Phase-1 data collection, and at no later stage. The postponement of the meeting of the National Board for Wildlife has no relationship to the ongoing tiger estimation process, and no discussion of outcomes of the ongoing tiger estimation methodology was in the agenda. The entire report accordingly appears to be a figment of imagination of your reporter. I request that this response be published in full, in accordance with the guidelines of the Press Council. Yours faithfully, (Prodipto Ghosh) The story does not question the methodology for tiger estimation though of course, one does wonder that if Phase III begins in September 2006, by when will the data collected/validated by Phase I & II finally conclude? 2007, if we are lucky. Will there be tigers then, and how many? As the indicators and trends go, the answer is written on the wall. Data available with Wildlife Protection Society of India shows that in 2004, 24 tiger skins, about 500 tiger claws and 13 cases of tiger deaths due to poaching and unnatural causes has been reported. In 2005, 16 mortality cases have been registered, 27 skins, 60 tiger paws, over 60 kgs of tiger bones have been seized. In the first four months of 2006, ten cases of tiger deaths have been reported, and five skins recovered. This does not include the tiger skins and bones recovered from Nepal and Tibet, which were sourced from India, or the many deaths that go unreported, and the skins and bones that go, undetected, to the market. Poachers have admitted, on record, to killing five tigers in Panna, and ten in Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve, in recent times. Sir, I would also like to point out that camera trapping has been ongoing in Panna since January, and has yielded no more than eight tigers, as against government record of 31. Worryingly, the enumeration has been on for five months now, so is this the kind of time we are looking at for each reserve - even when we have scientific data to back the fact that tiger numbers have dipped drastically. Because of poaching. And because in Panna lived mythical tigers, not in forests, but in government files. It has been established that numbers are hyped, how else did 'seven' tigers survive in Keladevi in Rajasthan, till the officials were forced to admit there were none. Suspect tiger deaths are hushed up as 'natural', as in the very recent case of a tiger that was found dead near the Tadoba Tiger reserve in the last week of April, its legs cut and separated from the body. It was said that it died in a territorial fight. Or should one cite the case of four tigresses being killed by a serial killer tiger in and around Corbett, till the authorities had to eat dust and admit that it could have been poisoning. It will serve the tiger better, if the MoEF accepts the problems and deals with them on a war footing, instead of pretending problems don't exist. It may be noted that both the MoEF and Project Tiger did not acknowledge that the tiger was extinct in Sariska, even though it had reports from Sariska staff, and from Wildlife Institute of India staff to the effect before the story came out in the press, and for long thereafter. I stand by my story. As a journalist, my job is to ferret out the truth from the field level, and I have done just that, reflecting trends as observed at the ground level in the primary phase, and with constant monitoring at the ground level. I wonder at the validity of a methodology that does not yield even approximate numbers, till Phase III, as pointed out by Mr Ghosh. I question the experts who have peer-reviewed such a methodology. It is excellent that the Tiger Task Force has also accepted the methodology, but may I point out that the very constitution of the TTF was questionable and its report tremendously controversial. I wish the secretary had taken the trouble to read the story carefully. Nowhere does it say that the meeting was postponed due to the tiger estimation process. Just that, it was proposed by authorities of Project Tiger to discuss the same, but the move was scuttled. And that the National Board for Wildlife meeting is not a priority, clearly indicated that it has barely met five times in the past decade, when it is supposed to meet twice a year. The report as published on April 30, is not figment of the reporter's imagination, but the fact that Royal Bengal Tigers are alive, and thriving.
Prerna Singh Bindra |
 |