ROAD TO NOWHERE

WHILE OTHER NATIONS LIMIT WILDLIFE NUMBERS IF COSTS OUTWEIGH BENEFITS, INDIA BEARS THE EXPENSES WITHOUT THINKING OF THE GAINS

- 

A LOT of water has flown down the Narmada and the Chambal since I joined the Madhya Pradesh cadre of the Indian Forest Service in 1977.

For many years into the service, I never realised that wild animals and people are in a deadly conflict. I was not taught wildlife management at the Indian Forest Collegethe precursor to the Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy. Humanwildlife conflict was also not in the curriculum when I came to the Forest Research Institute for training in wildlife management in 1981. Perhaps the phrase "human-wildlife conflict" (HWC) had not been coined yet. How could I think of it? Yes, how could I think of HWC when Jim Corbett, who had inspired to become a forester, had famously declared that tiger-the prima donna of Indian wildlifewas a large-hearted gentleman. So, as soon as I was trained and ready, I plunged into conserving the wildlife of Madhya Pradesh. When village residents questioned why we were saving dangerous animals, I gave sermons about the integrity of ecosystems and the interconnectedness of life. Any death or destruction caused by the "largehearted gentleman" or its associates was just collateral damage in a noble cause.

Even the affected people appeared to accept it as an act of God. HWC did not make much news then.

The Wild Life (Protection) Act (WLPA), 1972, was my bible. It was so logical and rational back then.