Stripes Vol 3 Issue 3

LA

ND

MA

RK

S

EV

ALU

AT

ION

AC

HIE

VEM

EN

TS

INIT

IAT

IVES

ST

RA

TEG

IES

PER

SPEC

TIV

ES

BI-MONTHLY OUTREACH JOURNAL OF NATIONAL TIGER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

Volume 3 Issue 3 Mar-Apr 2012

STATE-WISE RELEASE OF CENTRAL ASSISTANCEDuring 11th Plan Period Under Centrally Sponsored Scheme Of Project Tiger (MoEF)

STATE 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

Andhra Pradesh 73.918 56.983 138.254 155.645 154.406

Arunachal Pradesh 110.254 246.171 64.710 226.702 236.786

Assam 95.614 1092.379 194.290 1509.472 947.509

Bihar 98.321 49.673 8.856 158.355 172.193

Chhattisgarh 35.225 169.870 1383.502 1813.725 702.726

Jharkhand 45.160 115.377 117.139 130.616 156.347

Karnataka 1159.715 689.839 657.062 1660.050 1830.65

Kerala 153.245 267.090 311.4200 323.460 429.77

Madhya Pradesh 2975.941 6998.542 2,582.476 3962.730 5352.71

Maharashtra 295.719 411.125 373.517 2789.060 3622.342

Mizoram 82.900 241.450 2171.000 187.690 225.288

Orissa 43.280 625.990 221.740 815.290 555.076

Rajasthan 410.680 2708.950 10694.170 2368.925 67.21

Tamil Nadu 45.000 690.806 258.354 520.786 605.964

Uttarakhand 202.005 462.850 246.205 339.945 399.76

Uttar Pradesh 134.890 417.513 431.517 407.460 446.126

West Bengal 308.674 228.394 298.785 502.480 157.66

TOTAL 6,270.540 15,473.002 20,152.997 17,872.391 16,062.522

THE mangrove habitat of Sundarbans isunique. The normal approaches to tigerdensity estimation from camera trappopulation estimates are not applicablehere. It is not possible to derive theeffectively trapped area calculations

from the usual half mean maximum distance movedby recaptured tigers. Therefore, home ranges areestimated from tagged tigers. The radius of homerange is used to determine the effectively sampledarea from the camera trap polygon to calculate densi-ty estimates from camera traps, which is applied toall tiger-occupied areas of Sundarbans. The extentand relative abundance of tigers throughout the TR isfound through sign surveys in channels.

Tiger continues to be a predator least understood!The only long lasting bondage in a tiger’s lifecycle isthe relationship between a mother and its offspring.However, there have been numerous instances of aresident male (which has sired the litter) sharing akill with the mother and cubs. This issue carries an

interesting feature on the bond between a residentmale and orphaned cubs in Ranthambhore.

The North Eastern Hills and Brahmaputra FloodPlains is a vast landscape. This stretches across theflood plains of river Torsa in West Bengal, includespeaks of Khangchedzonga in Sikkim, besidesBrahmaputra flood plains and hills of Assam andMyanmar. There are seven tiger reserves in theregion — Buxa (West Bengal), Manas, Kaziranga,Nameri (Assam), Pakke, Namdapha (Arunachal) andDampa (Mizoram). Several of these reserves sharepolitical boundaries with Bhutan, Myanmar andBangladesh. The 2010 Assessment has estimated atiger population of 148 (118 to 178) in this region.The independent Management EffectivenessEvaluation has highlighted the strengths and weak-nesses of this cluster alongwith suggestions. Theseare being considered while firming up the respectiveTiger Conservation Plans.

Dr Rajesh Gopal Member-Secretary, NTCA

EDITOR Dr Rajesh Gopal

EDITORIALCOORDINATORS P YADAV

CONTENTCOORDINATORInder MS Kathuria

FEEDBACK Annexe No 5 Bikaner HouseShahjahan Road New Delhi

[email protected]

Cover photo Dharm KhandalRanthambhore

n o t e f r o m t h e e d i t o r

Volume 3Issue 3

March-Apr2012

PlayingFatherA uniqueglimpse ofparenting bymale tigers Pg 8

New TigerReserve A leg-up

for Kawal in Andhra

P16

FUNDSReserve-wiserelease in11th PlanPg 19

SundarbansStatus oftigers inmangrovelandscapePg 4

NortheastManagementEffectivenessEvaluation(MEE) oftigerreservesPg 10

BI-MONTHLY OUTREACH JOURNAL OF NATIONAL TIGER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

4 | March-Apr 2012 | STRIPES

Sundarbans is the world’slargest contiguous mangroveforest created at the conflu-

ence of the deltas of the RiversBrahmaputra, Ganga and Meghna.The delta spreads across the coun-tries of India and Bangladesh cov-ering 80,000 sqkm (Chakrabarti1992) with 38% (Mitra 2000) of it inIndia and the remaining inBangladesh. It comprises mudflats,creeks, tidal channels and an archi-pelago of about 102 islands ofwhich 54 are inhabited by humanpopulation (Bera and Sahay 2010).

To the north of Sundarbans arethe Himalayas, Rajmahal Hills tothe west and the Meghalayaplateau and Chittagong Hills tothe east (Chakrabarti 1992).Geologically, this area was carvedout in recent times by tidal actionand silt deposition and is stillunder formation. As a result ofneotectonic changes the Bengalbasin has been tilting eastwardsresulting in changes in the flowof River Ganga and subsequentlythe structure of this vast delta.With 1437.4 persons per sqkm(Qureshi et al. 2006) biodiversityconservation is a challenge,although the Tiger Reserve is freeof human settlements.

ECOLOGICAL BACKGROUND Human colonisation of this regionhappened relatively late due tothe inhospitable conditionsthough some people did occupythe area even in the 6th century(Chakrabarti 1992). The presentday district of the 24 Parganaswas ceded to East India Company

as part of the treaty of 1737 andthereafter became the jagir ofLord Clive (Chaudhuri 1989).However, it was only in 1770 thatserious efforts were made toreclaim land for agriculture byClaude Russell, the then collector-general of the district (Bera andSahay 2010). By 1878-79, 4856

km2 of this area was designated aReserved Forest (Bera and Sahay2010). In 1903, Sir DanielMackinnon Hamilton, a Scotsman,bought 40 sqkm of land whichincluded the islands ofRangabelia, Satjelia and Gosabawhere he established religiouscentres, dispensaries and cooper-

SundarbansLANDSCAPE

Status of Tigers, Co-Predators & Prey In India, 2010

Photos: H S Negi

STRIPES | March-Apr 2012 | 5

ative societies for tribals from theChhotanagpur region belongingto tribes like the Bhumij and theMundas (Chakrabarti 1992; Beraet al. 2010).

In 1978, many Partitionrefugees from Bangladeshescaped from the Dandakaranyagovernment resettlement camp incentral India and decided toestablish themselves atMarichjhanpi in Sundarbans, anarea that was until then free ofhuman presence and categorisedas a Reserved Forest. This act ledto violent clashes between thenew settlers and the Left govern-ment and resulted in massdeaths, brutality and disease in the region (Ghosh 2004).

In 1973-74, India declared2,585 sqkm of this area as aTiger Reserve with Bangladeshfollowing suit, declaring 23.5% ofthe remaining Sundarbans as aReserved Forest in 1977 by carv-ing out three sanctuaries viz.Sundarbans West, SundarbansEast and Sundarbans Southunder the Bangladesh Wildlife(Preservation) (Amendment) Act, 1974 (Barlow et al. 2008).

CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE The United Nations Educational,Scientific and CulturalOrganisation (UNESCO) in 1987 placed the IndianSundarbans on the WorldHeritage List for it being an out-standing example of ecologicaland biological processes in theevolution and development ofcoastal communities of plantsand animals and for the impor-tance of this region for biodiver-sity conservation. A decade laterthe Bangladesh part ofSundarbans was also added tothe same list.

With respect to the tiger, thisarea is a tiger conservation unit(TCU) of level 1 importance andthe only one in a mangrove habi-tat (Dinerstein et al. 1997).However, Sundarbans tigers of

India and Bangladesh form a sin-gle population, which is isolated from other tiger populations.

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES While several studies have beenconducted in this region to studystructure and composition ofmangroves (Prain 1903;Champion 1936; Bhattacharyya2002), dependence of local com-munities on such systems(Naskar, Guha & Bakshi 1987),

pollutant levels (Sarkara et al.2002; Guzzella et al. 2005)effects of climate change and sea level on Sundarbans(Naskar and Guha & Bakshi 1987;Mukherjee 2002; Hazra 2002) andgeology of the area (Bhattacharyaand Das 1994; Bhattacharya1999; Sanyal 1999 (in Sen andNaskar 2003), few studies havebeen conducted to assess statusof tigers and their prey in theIndian Sundarbans.

Most studies on tigers andtheir prey have been conductedon the Bangladesh side ofSundarbans. In 1971, HubertHendrichs conducted a threemonth study to identify reasonsfor man-eating by Sundarbanstigers. However, the projectcould not be completed but theinitial data indicated an associa-tion between man-eating behav-iour amongst tigers with increas-ing salinity levels. In more recenttimes, a long term study was ini-tiated in February 2005 by theBangladesh Wildlife Departmentfrom a funding by Save the TigerFund and the US Fish andWildlife Service to study tigerecology and prey availability.Some other studies to assessprey density have also been con-ducted in this landscape by Rezaet al. (2002). However, the mostimportant contribution to infor-mation on tiger ecology in thisregion is an outcome of studiesconducted by Adam Barlow inBangladesh Sundarbans, whichincludes monitoring tiger popula-tions in mangrove landscapes(Barlow et al. 2008), designingconservation framework to reduce human-tiger conflict(Barlow et al. 2010) and studyingthe impact of sea-level rise onSundarbans (Loucks et al. 2010).

However, on the Indian side,while several books have beenpublished on this region andman-eating tigers, scientific stud-ies on the tiger are lacking. Untilrecent times tiger numbers were

Forest guard at Sundarbans,fully equipped to take onmaneaters in the mangroves

determined using traditionalmethods like pugmark census,which have been considerederror prone by scientific commu-nities. Tiger census figures based on such methods produced esti-mates as high as 205 tigers in1979 and 269 in 1989 (Chakrabarti 1992).

The inaccessible terrain ofthese habitats makes scientificresearch a challenge thus fewsuch endeavours have beenattempted in this zone. The firsteffort to assess tigers and theirprey numbers in this region usingmore reliable scientific methodswas made by Ullas Karanth andNichols in mid 1990s followed bya more recent attempt at under-standing tiger ecology usingradio-telemetry by Jhala et. al.(current report and on-going).

CONSERVATION STATUS This region is under intensehuman pressure with around 3.5million people living within 20kilometres of its northern andeastern borders and dependingupon the forests for livelihoodresources. Annually, around35,330 people enter the forestsof Sundarbans to collect timber,fish, honey and other products(Chakrabarti 1992).

Most of the unique flora andfauna of this region is anywaybeing affected by the increasinglevels of salinity and sedimenta-tion which is a consequence ofreduced inflow of freshwater intothe delta due to construction ofdams and barrages (eg Farakka)upstream. Heritiera fomes, theplant that lends its name to theSundarbans is most threatenedalong with others like Nypha fruti-cans and Phoenix paludosa.

The increasing sea level in theevent of global climate change isalso predicted to affect thisregion negatively with continu-ous submergence of pneu-matophores of plants that wouldlead to asphyxiation and sanddeposition. The increasing level

of toxins and pesticides in thewaters of rivers entering thisarea is also alarming withadverse effects on the biodiversi-ty of the region. Other threats tothe region exist in the form ofmangrove conversion to paddyfields and shrimp farms andpresence of oil and gasexploratory activities in the area.

Apart from all the above indi-rect threats to the tiger in thisregion, poaching of the speciesmay also be prevalent with at least17 seizures of tiger skins and

body parts in areas aroundSundarbans in the last decadealone (data obtained from TRAFFICReport 2010 (Verheij et al. 2010)).

All these factors, along withthe isolated tiger population inthis zone, makes this an impor-tant tiger conservation unit witha high degree of threat requiringcontinuous monitoring and man-agement inputs.

MONITORING METHODOLOGY Due to the unique and hostilehabitat of the Sundarbans themethodology used across India(Phase I) for monitoring tigersand their prey could not be

applied. We adapted the method-ology to suit the environment ofthe Sundarbans. Since it was notpossible to walk in the mangroveforests for recording tiger signencounter rates due to lack ofproper animal trails as well asthe ever-present threat of tigerattack, we used tidal channelsearches across the Sundarbansto record sign and animalencounter rates. One hundredand twenty-six boat transectswith an effort of 1,163 km weresampled across the entire tigerreserve. A similar approach hasalso been used in the BangladeshSundarbans as well (Barlow et al.2008). The sign intensity dataacross the Sundarbans constitut-ed the Phase I data set.

We then used a combination ofsatellite-telemetry and cameratraps to estimate home rangesize, population and density oftigers (Phase III).

COLLARING OF TIGERS A total of five tigers, two adultfemales and three adult maleswere tagged with satellite radiocollars as a part of an ongoingstudy on the Sundarbans tigers.The tigers were trapped in cagesusing bait and were anesthetizedusing 3mg/kg ketamine and1.5mg/kg xylazene (Kreeger,1996) administered intra muscu-larly using a blowpipe.

The satellite collars (VECTRON-IX GPS Plus) weighed less than1.5% of the body weight of thetigers. The collars were pro-grammed to provide GPS fixesevery 30 minutes during phasesof intensive sampling and laterremotely reprogrammed to pro-vide five GPS fixes per day toconserve battery power.

Locations of tigers wereanalysed with ArcView v3.3 soft-ware (ESRI, Redlands, California)and Animal Movement extensionv1.1 (Hooge and Eichenlaub1997), to construct MinimumConvex Polygon (MCP) (Mohr andStumpf 1966) and Fixed Kernel


This region is underintense human pres-sure with around 3.5million people livingwithin 20km of itsnorthern and easternborders and depend-ing upon the forestsfor livelihoodresources. Annually,around 35,330 peopleenter the forests ofSundarbans to collecttimber, fish, honeyand other products

(FK) (Worton 1989) home ranges.Activity time periods, frequencyof crossing water channels of var-ious widths, and distances movedwithin a day were also computed.

Due to the difficulty of walkingin the mangrove forests andlocating game trails for settingcamera traps, we could notdeploy camera traps in a system-atic grid based approach usedacross India. Instead, we set upcamera traps at strategic loca-tions, near fresh and brackishwater ponds, using attractants tolure tigers to our camera stations.

We also used fishing nets toorient the approaching tigers toget proper flank photographs foruniquely identifying each tigerfrom its stripe patterns. We esti-mated the tiger population in amark re-capture framework withclosed population estimators inan area of about 200 sqkm. Thisset-up allowed us to estimatepopulation size reliably. But dueto the small number of camerastations (12) and uneven geo-graphical spread of camera traps,it was not possible to obtain areliable estimate of mean maxi-mum distance (MMDM) moved byrecaptured tigers nor use the

spatially explicit models (Effordet al. 2009) effectively.

Models estimating effectivetrapping area attempt to estimatehome range radius either by esti-mating MMDM or through centresof activity, in the case of theSundarbans we had direct esti-mates of home ranges based ontelemetry data. We therefore usedhome range radius from 95%fixed kernel area estimates oftiger home ranges as a buffer tothe camera trap polygon for esti-mating effectively trapped area.

Our telemetry data suggeststhat though tigers do cross widechannels, crossing of channels >1km in width was rare. We there-fore used a habitat mask whereinchannels >1km in width wereconsidered barriers to movementover the short term duration ofthe camera trapping exercise.

We photo-captured 10 adulttigers and two cubs. The bestmodel selected by CAPTURE wasmodel Mh (incorporating individ-ual heterogeneity) and the popula-tion estimate was 11 (se 3) tigers.The home range radius of foursatellite-radio tagged and cameratrapped polygon, giving an area of438 sqkm. After applying a habi-

tat mask bounded by channels >1km the effectively camera trappedarea was 257 sqkm. Tiger densitywas computed to be 4.3 (se 0.3)tiger per 100 sqkm.

Since tiger occupied area ofthe Sundarbans Tiger Reservewas 1645 sqkm2 and the tigersigns were found throughout thisarea with a similar variationacross the Tiger Reserve as foundwithin the camera trapped area,it would be possible to extrapo-late this tiger density across thereserve without much loss ofaccuracy.

Ideally, 2-4 additional cameratrap replicate areas need to besampled and additional datafrom radio collared tigers areneeded to provide more accurateand precise estimates of tigerdensity. But till these areobtained, this first quantitativeassessment estimates the numberof tigers to be around 70 (64 to90) tigers for the SundarbansTiger Reserve (in 1645 sqkm).

Further refinement in method-ology, involvement of other insti-tutions is needed and mentionmust be made that the 2010 esti-mate is subject to further studyand by better methodology.



Rajesh Kumar GuptaCF & Field Director,Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve

Tigers are solitary beastsrarely with social organisa-tions except during mat-

ings or at sharing kills. Tigresseswith cubs behave more sociallythan the male counterparts forthe initial period of 19-20months. There have been obser-vations of adults of the first lit-ter coming close to the mothertigress, signifying social behav-iour which is more prominent inthe initial two to three years.

What is now happening inRanthambhore will denote thesheer complexity of tiger behav-iour. The common belief that thetiger is solitary finds contradic-tions dictated by capacity of invi-olate area or something innate inthe tiger’s mind — which we can-not scan!

Ranthambhore — an abode ofthe Royal Bengal Tiger, exhibitsinteresting behaviour of thetigers. George Schaller’s observa-tions in the 1960s puts on record

kill shared by tigress and cubswith a male — an example ofsocial organization.

He observed that tigers appearto socialize more at kills than onany other occasion. It is a well-conceived thought that adulttigers readily join for brief peri-ods, particularly at a plentifulfood supply, but their associa-tion rarely persists longer(Schaller 1964).

Schaller rendered some inter-esting observations in 1964 of akill shared by a tigress with cubsan adult male: “I tied a buffalo toa stump at 1630 hours and wait-ed in a blind 80 feet away. At1940 hours, a tigress attackedthe animal which died eight min-utes later. Five minutes after thecubs (three) arrive at the kill, thetigress appears and right behindher is the male tiger. The malerises at 2250 hrs and walks tothe kill. Two cubs nuzzle his faceand neck...”

This gave the first probableglimpse of the strange “affection-ate” behaviour of the male tigers.The role of the tigress in rearing

the cubs for 19-20 months hasalways overshadowed the“fatherhood status of maletigers”. Being a surreptitiousspecies, such behaviour in maletigers, being hardly noticed orvery less documented, the‘parental protection’ provided bythe males deserve special placein tiger behaviour.

Ranthambhore National Parkwith an area of 282 sqkm gave tothe tiger lovers of the world apeculiar, astonishing and amaz-ing breakthrough in the behav-iour of male tigers.

The male tigers of Rantham-bhore show peculiar ephemeralassociation with the cubs.Generally. the cubs are protectedand reared by the tigress till 19-20months and males share spacewith the cubs during kills.

In Ranthambhore NationalPark, T19 female with 3 cubs arein the bigger home range of theirpresumed father T28. The territo-ry of T28 has increased or varieswith the movement of T19 andher 3 cubs, signifying reach ofparental protection by the males.

Playing FatherPlaying FatherVenkatesh Sharma


On 18 March 2012, I sighted theT19 female with 2 cubs. One ofthe cubs stood up and movedclose to the male T28 and satbeside him to get affection.

On another occasion (29 March2012), I was returning from nightpatrolling and was greeted by theT8 tigress with two cubs close tothe father male T34. The cubswere seen with the tigress andthe male again after a few daysin the same area.

It has been noticed that T8with her two cubs are residentwithin the home range of T34male, in the Sawai MansinghSanctuary.

The T26 tigress with three cubsstay in close vicinity of T20, anold male. T31 with two cubs arefrequently visited by T23, a male.T11 with three cubs are protectedby the male T33. T30 with a litterof three cubs are being protectedby T3. T9 with two cubs are pro-tected by T33 male.

These associations signifysocial behaviour in tigers, espe-cially considering the fact that 5out of the 7 mother tigresses arewith cubs 15-18 months old. Sucha long association of the maletiger in each of the “families”shows affectionate behaviour intiger, demanding fatherhoodrecognition to the male tigers.

Another possible explanationcould be the apprehension ofinfanticide by unrelated males.The father of the cubs are providing parental protection to prevent infanticide of theirsiblings and gradually extendingtheir supremacy with related ones.

With a history of very lowinfanticide incidence rate inRanthambhore, this behaviour of“parental protection” by malesassumes very high significance intiger ecology. Is it a strategy bythe Ranthambhore tigers toestablish their strong genes andconsolidate ‘genetic supremacy’ ?

What was observed by Schallerin the 1960s and being seen in

Ranthambhore for the past fewyears, surpassed all imaginationin the tigerlands across the worldwith an incidence in 2011.

A male Tiger T25 is being seento rear two orphan cubs in thewild, opening a new chapter ofparental care and protection bymale tigers. Is this the epitomeof male affectionate behaviour intigers where orphans are beingreared by a male tiger?

On 29 January 2011,T5, afemale tigress who was beingtracked for the past few days wassighted with two cubs. The moth-er tigress died of a physiologicalproblem within 10 days on 9February, close to the Kachida

chowki, leaving the 3-4 month-old cubs unfortunately chris-tened “orphans”. The cubs of 3-4months were traced by the videocamera specially installed in thehome range of the mother T5.

The management decided torear the cubs in wild by supply-ing food supplement. The cubsdisappeared in first week of May2011 and rapid search teamswere placed to track it. To thesurprise of the world, a cameratrap picture in May revealed T25

male closely following one of thecubs, 5-8km away from the homeof the cubs. The staff had laterobtained pugmarks of the twocubs along the movement of themale T25, also testified by directsightings of the male with thetwo cubs.

In the context of prevalentconcept of “infanticide” in tigerecology, it was initially unaccept-able that the male T25 wouldactually protect the cubs. Withtime, observations revealed thatT25 was actually providing pro-tection to the orphan femalecubs in an area of other males(T6,T33) and female ( T17).

Repeated camera trap picturesand direct field observationsrevealed that T25 has been roam-ing with the two orphan cubs andprotecting them from the age offour months in a range of othertigers, panthers and hyenas. Onone occasion, T25 has beensighted coming in direct con-frontation with T17 female, toprotect the two cubs. Such amaz-ing behaviour of the male tiger intiger ecology marks the unex-plored area of behavioural ecolo-gy in tigers.

The cubs are now almost 17-18months old and are survivingwithout bait for 15-20 days, sug-gesting sharing of kills of themale T25 or direct kills by thecubs. The cubs had made a chitalkill a month back in March. Sincethe male T25 is playing the roleof the mother, a definite lag peri-od would occur for total inde-pendence but future observationswill give a better picture.

With the observation of the male T25 marking the climaxof male protection to its cubs, ithas become amply clear thatmale tigers do display affection-ate behaviour, resorting toparental care or protection toestablish its strong genes. It maybe a strategy of survival of itssiblings but research and obser-vations should continue to cometo definite conclusion.

A male Tiger T25 isbeing seen to rear twoorphan cubs in thewild, opening a newchapter of parentalcare and protectionby male tigers. A camera trap picturerevealed T25 maleclosely following oneof the cubs away fromtheir home. Is this the epitome of maleaffectionate behaviour in tigers?


PAKKE TIGER RESERVEStrengths | TR forms part of larg-er landscape with adjoining SonaiRupai Sanctuary and Nameri TRand also reserve forests such asTenga, Doimara and Pappum. TheSessa Orchid Sanctuary and EagleNest Sanctuary are also adjacent.Watershed with several streamsoriginating from the landscapeleading to Pakke and Kamengrivers. The area also forms partof the Kameng Elephant Reserve.Excellent protection mechanism,man management and interactionand local tribe interaction andparticipation. TR is free fromhuman habitation and is protect-ed rivers on three sides.

Weaknesses | Inadequate front-line staff, strength, workingmostly as casual labour.Inadequate funding, late disbur-sal. Not enough support fromProject Elephant. Very poor infra-structure and visitor service. Noresearch and monitoring mecha-nism. Ethnic insurgency on theoutskirts. No interpretation cen-tre or organized awareness pro-gramme. Perceived threat fromconstruction of 500MW powerhouse at Kimi, adjacent to PakkeTR. Colonies of constructionworkers, machinery barring ele-phant movement. Perceivedthreat from construction of 24kmroad along Kameng river (TRboundary). Fringe area communi-ties exert some pressure in theform of NTFP collection and tra-ditional tribal hunting.

Suggestions | Timely fundrelease by state and enhancedsupport. Well-planned ecodevel-opment programme to be initiat-ed. Infrastructure support forpatrolling vehicles, buildingrepair, equipment etc. Supportfor grain for grain scheme (cropraiding compensation) fromElephant Project. Buffer of the TRis to be notified. DFO Pakke whois in charge of both TR and twoWLSs must be relieved from addi-

tional responsibilities or at leasttwo ACFs must be posted forwildlife sanctuaries and one foreco-development. At least 4 staffeach for anti poaching campstriking force. More facilities forfield camps. A gypsy placedinside would help faster move-ment in case of emergencies.Veterinary support.

NAMDAPHA TIGER RESERVEStrengths | Bordered by Kamlangwildlife sanctuary in north, MiaoRF, Nampong RF, Diyun RF in the

west, forest areas of KachinProvince of Myanmar in southand USF areas of Gandhigram inthe east, very rich in biodiversi-ty. Inaccessible area with densevegetation and almost no roadcommunication, valleys withwatershed of Noa-Dehing river.Immense ecological, educational,ethological, historical,scientific and ethnic values.

Weaknesses | Inadequate,untrained staff. Inadequate infra-structure. Low priority to wildlife

northeastManagement Effectiveness Evaluation Of Tiger

Reserves In India | Process and Outcomes 2010-11


sector by state government. Nosubstantial support from civiland judiciary on control ofpoaching. No ecodevelopment oractivities to seek cooperationfrom various ethnic communi-ties. Ecotourism on meagre scale.No buffer notified. Encroachmentby 84 families of Lishu peoplesettled in five villages withincore. Road from Debang toVijayanagar, now maintained byPWD, could be helpful in protec-tion but could be a major threat.

Suggestions | More trained andmotivated staff. Lisu settlement incore to be resettled/removed.Road connecting Miao toVijayanagar must be under directcontrol of field director, NTR, forall purposes. Buffer to be notified.Ecodevelopment programme to beimplemented. A mechanism forresearch and monitoring. Habitatmanagement measures to be takenup and monitored. Ecotourismactivities to be streamlined involv-ing local communities.

KAZIRANGA TIGER RESERVEStrengths | Kaziranga-KarbiAnglong landscape characterizedby 15 vegetation types. Has onlyviable population of tiger inAssam with high density, world’slargest population of great Indianone horned rhinoceros, a largepopulation of Asiatic wild buffa-lo, last surviving population east-ern swamp deer, a good popula-tion of elephants and significantpopulation of endangered andvulnerable species like Gangeticriver dolphin, Hoolock gibbonand capped langur. Area fallsunder Kaziranga Karbi AnglongElephant Reserve. Core area freefrom human habitation. Verygood stakeholder participationwhile preparing tiger conserva-tion protocol. One of the bestprotection strategies. Strong NGOsupport for tiger populationmonitoring. New initiatives toprovide opportunities for localcommunities to promote tourism.

Weaknesses | Habitat degrada-tion due to invasive species.Wetland degradation and block-age of natural channels by waterhyacinth choking and sedimenta-tion. Lack of habitat and popula-tion monitoring mechanism.Biotic pressures in corridor andaddition areas. Speeding trafficalong NH 37. Lack of co-ordina-tion/dialogue with adjacent teaestate management. Delay inrelease of funds.

Suggestions | Important to initi-ate steps for habitat and popula-tion monitoring. Initiate highwaypatrolling using vehicles in placeof on foot patrolling. TigerConservation Foundation to bemade functional. Compile all theresearch reports on the Reserveand adjacent areas. Promoteresearch and initiate discussions

with Research Institutions andUniversities. Periodic review oftourism activities by referring tothe feed back from the visitors.

NAMERI TIGER RESERVEStrengths | Part of a larger land-scape contiguous with Pakke TRand adjacent areas. Nameri isrich with elephant, tiger, gaur,White Winged Wood Duck, GreatHornbill, Rufous necked Hornbill,Wreathed Hornbill, Oriental PiedHornbill, Assam Roofed Turtleetc. Core area free of humanhabitations. The River Jia-Bhoreli,constituting the Western bound-ary of the National Park is theabode of the Golden Mahsheer,Silgharia etc. The PA is alsoworth for its scenic landscape

Weakness | Buffer not under theTR and there is no field director

though the DFO in charge ofNameri is redesignated. Verypoor funding and the meagerfund is released very late. Severeshortage of field staff and mostare in the age group 40-48 years.Lack of training. Core area ismanaged by one Range atPotasali. Another Range is neededat Seijosa to control the easternflank of the area. Buffer areas donot have anti-poaching camps orthe staff and thus have no pro-tection mechanism to check theactivities of unscrupulous ele-ments. Degradation of the habitatespecially the grass lands byBombax and choking of waterbodies by aquatic weeds. Lack ofa proper Tiger Conservation Plan.Severe degradation and encroach-ment of buffer areas of TigerReserve: A major portion of thebuffer areas of the Tiger Reservehas become severely degradedand encroached upon by organ-ized groups. Silting up of waterbodies due to soil erosion in theupper reaches. Manifold increasein population of forest villagesand encroachment upon adjoin-ing forest land. Emergent law andorder situation due to ethnopolit-ical upsurges. Passage ofBalipara-Bhalukpong roadthrough the buffer area, whichwill have negative impact on thecorridors of elephants and con-fine them to the national park.Very poor tourism and ecodevel-opment initiatives.

Suggestions | A review of the sit-uation by NTCA with the stateauthorities for addressing theimmediate requirement. Bufferarea to be brought under TR andboth under a field director of CFrank with DFO for its core andbuffer area with adequate fieldstaff and ACF for monitoring andeco-development. Preparation ofa Tiger Conservation Plan. Amechanism in the state for time-ly release of funds and betterstate support. Immediate fundingsupport for anti poaching, ecode-

velopment, research and moni-toring, visitor facilities and stafffacilities. Identifying the habitatrelated issues and addressingand monitoring. Separate fundingfor elephant depredation control.Trainings on legal, modernequipment handling, formatreporting and field exercises.

MANAS TIGER RESERVEStrengths | Except for 16.30 sqkm in Panbari Reserve in thefringe and 20 ha. at Betbari inNorth Kamrup Reserve used onlyfor cultivation, which wereencroached during 1996 (peak ofethnic strife), the core area of theManas TR is free from human set-tlement. Relocation of these set-tlements is being addressedthrough negotiations with thelocal people. Excellent availabili-ty of water in the reserve. Part ofa larger landscape, the TR is con-tiguous with the forests of

Bhutan in the north and Buxa TRin the West. It also links forestsof Arunachal Pradesh throughBhutan, thus becoming a signifi-cant unit in a large landscape.Dynamic ecosystem. Post ethnicstrife, the recovery of habitatsand species is reported to beremarkable. Home of large num-ber of Schedule I and endemicspecies like golden langur,pygmy hog, hispid hare, Assamroofed turtle, marbled and gold-en cats, clouded leopard, Bengalflorican and white wing woodduck place Manas in an exclusivecategory of Protected Areas har-bouring significant numbers ofthese unique species. World her-itage site, globally recognizedbiosphere reserve. Good supportfrom NGOs.

Weaknesses | Multiplicity ofmanagement in buffer area.Buffer forests fall within the


Post ethnic strife, the recovery of habitats andspecies in Manas Tiger Reserve is reported to beremarkable. Home to the golden langur, pygmyhog, hispid hare, Assam roofed turtle, marbledand golden cats and clouded leopard, Manas inan exclusive category of PAs harbouring signifi-cant numbers of unique species

S P Yadav

jurisdiction of Forest Chief ofBodoland Territorial Council, andcore area is under the control ofCWLW, Assam. Occasionally pro-fessional fishermen sneak intothe reserve taking advantage ofunprotected southern tip of theriver Manas at Narayanguri. Apartfrom illegal fishing, such intru-sions threaten protection of rein-troduced rhinos. Absence offorested buffer along the south-ern boundary.

The villagers are poor and inthe absence of forest areas andcommons in their vicinity,depend upon the fringe of thecore for their resource require-ment, which primarily includesgrazing spaces, fuel wood andsmall timber and NTFP collection.On the other hand, due toabsence of buffer forests, thewild animals frequently enter vil-lage lands and cause conflict.Poor infrastructure. Lack of clari-ty in the role of volunteers.Dependency of forest villagesand fringe dwellers.Apprehension on Forest Right Act2006. Societal lack of awareness,compounded by poverty, poorphysical infrastructure. Thefringe area is also infested bymalaria. Lack of interpretational

venues. Staff is untrained and iscoming out of a very turbulenttime. Absence of a well writtenTCP make it prone to acceptanceof any programmes mooted byothers. The state governmentrelease even the NTCA funds atthe end of February.

Suggestions | Discuss with theForest Chief of BodolandTerritorial Council for placingbuffer areas under the unifiedcommand of Field Director.Prepare a volunteer deploymentprogramme and create adminis-trative structure, whereby theybecome part of the beats andwork under the supervision ofregular staff. Provide training onecodevelopment, ecotourism,wildlife monitoring and interpre-tation to staff and volunteer andbuild up interpretation pro-gramme to increase awareness.Develop habitat monitoring pro-tocols to assess the direction ofchange that suggests recovery ofhabitats and species. Initiate dia-logue with district administrationand local councils to channelfunds for ecodevelopment activi-ties. Train some of the volun-teers in ecodevelopment, so thatthey could be the link between

MTR and local villages. Promoterelationship with the NGOsfor eliciting wider support forconservation of MTR. TheBodoland Territorial Council andthe state government shouldensure timely release of funds.There could be a motorable roadalong the southern boundary foreffective protection.

DAMPA TIGER RESERVEStrengths | Habitat for species ofhigh conservation value: DampaTiger Reserve is a representativeexample of eastern Himalaya har-bouring several species of nonhuman primates of the north-eastHimalaya and clouded leopard,marbled cat, golden cat, Malayansun bear etc. No human settle-ments in the core area. Sevenperennial rivers. Legally protect-ed. Gradual attitudinal change inthe local communities supportingconservation.

Weaknesses | Poor infrastruc-ture, poor funding, including thatof NTCA, which seldom reach ontime. Vulnerable areas do nothave appropriate infrastructureto support protection and inade-quacy of arms, ammunition, fieldequipment affect effective pro-tection of BTR. Inadequacy offield staff. Long internationalborder, so possibility of tribalpeople moving into DTR fromborder areas. Poor connectivity,very few trails which hampersmovement of staff for protectionduties. Shifting cultivation inaround 19 villages in buffer area.Buffer not under administrationof field director.

Suggestions | CWLW must ensurefunding is timely. An interpreta-tion facility may be opened atFD’s office at West Fialeng forincreasing opportunities of out-reach. The draft TCP proposes fora number of staff, vehicles, armsand ammunition, field equipmentand physical infrastructure. On atime-bound basis, the proposed


facilities should be made avail-able. The FD must immediatelystart short training courses onwildlife management, ecotourismand ecodevelopment for the staff.MoU with Bangladesh on regularexchange of information betweenforests and civil administrationmay be helpful in protecting theborder areas and improving corri-dor values.

BUXA TIGER RESERVEStrengths | TR is located at theconfluence of 3 major biogeo-graphic zones — lower Gangeticplains, central Himalayas andBrahmaputra valley, resulting inpresence of unique and rarespecies. Potential site for longterm conservation of not onlytiger and its prey base, but alsothe elephant. Many rivers, suchas Sankosh, Rydak, Jainti, Dima.Compact forests within oneadministration. Both core and

buffer managed under unifiedcommand of the field director.Meticulous historical records of

forest management. Financialsupport from state government.

Weaknesses | Present core areaof 390.58 sq km is grossly inade-quate for a viable breeding popu-lation of tiger. Nine human set-tlements within core. Influx ofvillagers from buffer and fringeareas. Surrounded by numerousvillages and tea gardens. Around30 forest villages inside reserveand 4 fixed demand holdings,leading to degradation of forests.Strained relationship between TRmanagement and locals.Inadequacy in habitat manage-ment. Inability to relocate vil-lages from within core.Inadequate staff amenities. Nonfunctional Foundation, inadequa-cy of training in wildlife manage-ment for staff.

Suggestions | Dialogue with own-ers of tea gardens to make


High population den-sity in the fringe areasand their highresource dependenceare a major threat toSundarbans, adding topoor protection, thelack of research and monitoring ofecological processesand the unrestrictednumber of touristsand unplanned growthof tourist lodges inthe mangroves

S P Yadav

arrangements for fuel wood pro-duction for their own labourers.Design forestry operations forhabitat management and locallivelihood security. Preparemicroplans for utilization ofNREGS funds for watershed man-agement, water harvesting, pas-ture development etc. Developecotourism as community-centricactivity and prepare communitymembers to manage ecotourism.Finalize Special Tiger ProtectionForce (STPF) deployment in help-ing management against illegalactivities, especially poaching.Institutionalized mechanism forcoordination with the neighbour-ing Bhutan for protection.

SUNDARBANS TIGER RESERVEStrengths | Absence of villages,settlements in TR. One of thelargest standalone tiger popula-tions in the country in a uniquehabitat of mangroves. Ecologicalcontiguity of habitat (mangroveforests) on all three side of thearea ie Bangladesh Sundarbanson the east, adjoining forest divi-sion 24-Parganas South on theWest and Sajnekhali WildlifeSanctuary and adjoining ReserveForest area in the north.Extremely rich in biodiversity,especially populations of manyendangered animals like horse-shoe crabs, estuarine crocodile,Irrawady and Gangetic dolphins,Olive Ridley turtles, King cobraetc. Largest contiguous patch ofmangrove forest in the world.

Weaknesses | Porous internation-al border with Bangladesh. Highpopulation density coupled withpoor socio-economic condition ofpeople living in the fringe areasand proper infrastructure leadingto high resource dependence.Inadequate number of protectioncamps at strategic locations, cou-pled with old weapons and slowmoving boats. Absence of drink-ing water at most places. Lack ofproper research and monitoringof ecological processes and pop-

ulation dynamics of key species.Inadequate inter-agency coordi-nation. Unrestricted number oftourist, unplanned growth oftourist lodges in the vicinity.Man eating propensity of thetiger within forest areas.

Suggestions | System of registra-tion of private tourist boats, sothat reserve is aware of the num-ber of boats and their movement.Daily sighting records should beconverted into occupancy state-ments using elementary statis-

tics. improve monitoring of vege-tation changes, introduce mecha-nisms to liaise effectively withrural development departments,revenue departments, tourismdepartments etc. Upscale liveli-hood security programmes intointegrated area development pro-grammes. Work for MoU withBangladesh to ensure preventionof smuggling of timber, NTFPsand wildlife articles.

Recommendations | An institu-tionalized mechanism for at leastbi-annual meetings with officialsof adjoining countries —exchange of information. MoUswith SSB & NTCA to control traf-ficking with Bangladesh, Bhutan& Myanmar. More inputs to makeTiger Reserve Foundation func-

tional. Mechanism in the states(except West Bengal) for timelyrelease of funds to the TRs. Areview of the functioning ofstate- level steering committee.Critical assessment of the TCPsto help have a proper plan. Closemonitoring of/technical assis-tance by NTCA for implementa-tion of TCPs — form a compati-ble team depending on the areaand report to NTCA — includeexpert and good and capableNGO representative. Regionallevel meetings of TR managers toexchange ideas and discuss prob-lems. One TR director to co-ordi-nate and an observer from NTCAInitiation of ecodevelopmentactivities involving some partnerNGOs for better planning, imple-mentation and reciprocal com-mitment support — an ACF exclu-sive for EDC Involving selectedstake holders in planning andimplementation to mitigate thethreats. Monitoring mechanismsto be in place for selected indica-tor species and habitat and tech-nical support to be provided byNTCA, wherever necessary. Crashtraining programmes (sitelevel/state level/regional) on var-ious aspects at least for the sen-ior/field level managers.

Special recruitment drive forthe TR (exclusive with no trans-fer) — preferably from thelocal/regional. Experience inDampa brings goodwill and stayin place. There are TigerReserves with several status(Biosphere Reserve, ElephantReserve and World Heritage Site).Such reserve can have one com-posite Plan with different budgetprovisions. The landscape com-prising of more than one TigerReserve and a number of forestareas with different status andconnectivity may be treated as alandscape and brought undercommon management strategyand action plan (Eg. Manas, Buxaand the adjoining forests).Upload a copy of the TCP onwebsite for better transparency.


A mouse deer caught on camera trap in Kanha

The state government ofAndhra Pradesh notifiedthe Kawal Wildlife

Sanctuary as a tiger reserve inApril 2012, making it the 41sttiger reserve in the country.

Kawal Wildlife Sanctuary, withan area on 893.23 sq km, is locat-ed in the northern region ofAndhra Pradesh and it spreadsover territorial divisions ofJannaram and Nirmal in Adilabaddistrict. It is one of the oldest

sanctuaries in the state and isconsidered to be the best habitatfor tiger conservation in thenorth of Andhra Pradesh.

The Kawal Wildlife Sanctuarywas managed as a Protected Areaby the erstwhile Nizam ofHyderabad state and was usedfor shikar by the Nizam. Afterthe formation of Andhra Pradeshstate, this area was notified asGame Reserve in 1965.

The government of Andhra

Pradesh later declared the KawalWildlife Sanctuary under Section26 (A) of Wildlife (Protection) Act1972 in 1999.

FOREST TYPE, FLORA & FAUNAKawal is the largest sanctuary in

North Telangana and is known forrich tropical dry deciduous forestswith predominance of teak, bam-boo and abundance of wild fauna.The landscape in this area ismosaic of dense forests, patches


BEGINNINGS

Kawal: A New Tiger Reserve

S P Yadav

of open grassy plains and waterbodies. A number of streams andrivulets like Cheekamanu vaagu,Pavurala vaagu, Pedda vaagu etcwhich are tributaries of riversKadem and Godavari flow throughthe sanctuary area making it excel-lent habitat for the wildlife. Theimportant faunal species includetiger, panther, wolf, wild dogs,sloth bear, Gaur (Indian Bison),Sambar, Chital, mouse deer,Neelgai, Chowsinga, blackbuck,Chinkara etc

MANAGEMENT OF SANCTUARYFor scientific management of thesanctuary, a Management Plan wasprepared and is under implemen-tation with plan period 2003 to2013. As per the plan, extractionof bamboo, collection of beedi leafetc have been stopped in the sanc-tuary area. Only habitat improve-ment works and protection meas-ures are being implemented. Thefunding support is from CentrallySponsored Schemes, 13th FinanceCommission, Normal State Planand CAMPA duly following theManagement Plan in force.

OBJECTIVES To improve the tiger habitat byconsolidating the boundary andthe habitat within the sanctuarythis is fragmented due toencroachments & habitations To manage wild animal popula-tion including tiger as sourcepopulation and for improvingtheir numbers which can thendisperse into adjacent areas To strengthen protection ininterior areas by deploying staff,improving communication andmobility To monitor the habitat andwild animal densities with peri-odic estimation on scientificlines including camera trapping. To create awareness amongpeople for conservation To establish biodiversityresearch centre for bringing outthe floral and faunal wealth ofthe sanctuary

To promote community-basedecotourism on a sustainablebasis with involvement of localcommunities as a tool for achiev-ing the objective of involvinggeneral public in conservation ofthe biodiversity of the area.

JUSTIFICATION FOR PROPOSAL The forests of Kawal WildlifeSanctuary form a corridor withforest tract of Tadoba NationalPark in the Maharashtra which isa Tiger Reserve with good popu-

lation of Tigers. The declarationof Kawal Wildlife Sanctuary as atiger reserve will be most benefi-cial not only to Kawal but also toTadoba as the tigers are knownto disperse between the two for-est tracts which share a similarforest landscape. The tiger population of Tadoba can be a

source population for dispersinginto Kawal tiger reserve whichhas a habitat capable of supporting good many tigers.

In the recent past, this sanctu-ary along with the vast adjoiningforests tract covering over 6500sqkm was supporting a healthytiger population numbering 20 to25. Between 1990 and 2005,when the extremists’ problemwas at its peak in the state, par-ticularly in North Telangana, pro-tection in the sanctuary washampered. The field staff mem-bers did not have the freedom tomove in the forest areas due toextremists’ threat. The arms andammunition and wireless setsavailable with the field staff werealso withdrawn and kept withPolice department for securityreasons. During this period thetiger habitat suffered greatlyfrom encroachments, habitatfragmentation, illicit felling oftrees, uncontrolled grazing etc.The tiger population as a resultdeclined this period.

IMPROVED GROUND SITUATIONBut the situation changed after2005 when the extremists’ prob-lem totally came under controlbecause of the measures taken bythe government. Today, the fieldofficers are able to move freely inthe sanctuary area and visit eventhe most remote locations. Theprotection has improved and thearea is showing definite signs ofrecovery from wildlife point ofview. The annual census oftiger/panther and the estimationof prey species taken every yearindicate that Kawal and its sur-rounding forests still supportaround 7 to 10 tigers. This popu-lation can be built upon withintensive protection and habitatimprovement measures.

It is also important to note thatKawal has forest areas contiguouswith forests of other divisions likeAdilabad, Mancherial, Nirmal andBellampally measuring 6637 sqkm.All these forest divisions have


Along with the entryof rhinos, the frontline staff seemsmore motivated andlocal communities areinvolved. Rebuildingis on and assured funding from government sources is helping the parktake bigger strides

S P Yadav

dense forests which are ideal habi-tat for the tiger. In fact, the entireNorth Telangana forest landscaperight from Adilabad to Khammamupto river Godavari has continuousforests which can support ahealthy tiger population. Theacceptance of Kawal WildlifeSanctuary as a Tiger Reserve willenable the government of AndhraPradesh to manage the surroundingforest areas as buffer to the KawalWildlife Sanctuary and will give aboost to conservation of tiger inthe entire North Telangana land-scape. It would not be out of placeto mention here that Kawal is thelast hope in North Telangana forbuilding a viable tiger populationand that in turn will help managethe landscape as a conservationunit and build a healthy ecosystemwith a lot of biodiversity value.

ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUESThe Kawal tiger reserve spreadsover Jannaram and Nirmal divi-sions. There is need to bring theentire sanctuary under a unifiedPA manager by merging the tworanges of Nirmal Division withJannaram Division. The notifica-tion of Kawal Wildlife Sanctuaryas tiger reserve will help in bring-ing the entire sanctuary areaunder a unified command to facil-itate management and administra-tion. Already the department hastaken measures to post wildlifetrained officer as DFO wildlifemanagement Jannaram. Steps are

being taken to post trained offi-cers at the level of ACFs andrange officers. Training of fieldstaff in wildlife management hasbeen launched with the help ofNGOs like WWF, WTI, HyderabadTiger Conservation authority etc.

PROTECTION MEASURES Six base camps established atkey locations with 6-8 personsper camp to patrol interior areasTwo strike forces with fastmoving vehicle in sanctuary areafalling in jurisdiction ofJannaram and Nirmal Divisions12 wild animal trackers tomonitor movement of wild ani-mals on daily basisThree checkposts at key locations to check offences andrestrict movement of vehicles inthe sanctuary at night Night traffic closed from 9pmto 6am on road from Birsaipet toJannaram by erecting checkpost

HABITAT IMPROVEMENTUprooting obnoxious weedand encouraging local vegetationand grass Improvement of natural watersources and creating artificialsources in areas with scarcityDevelopment of new fodderplots and maintaining existingones to build herbivore populationNew fire lines to manage fire

WIRELESS NETWORKIt is proposed to improve commu-

nication through wireless as largepart of sanctuary area does nothave mobile phone coverage by:Setting up 7 fixed wirelessstations at division and rangeheadquarters.Installing 13 mobile wirelesssets on vehicles with DFO, FROs,Strike Force Providing handsets to all offi-cials from DFO to FBO.

ESTIMATION/CENSUSPermanent carnivore trail andherbivore transects for estima-tion workCamera traps for estimationand monitoring Digital cameras and handheld GPS for all officers up to beat level.

PROPOSED RESEARCH,EDUCATION AND EXTENSIONEstablishing a biodiversity

laboratory to document flora andfauna and further research onspecies, habitat & evaluation inthe sanctuary Engaging two research assistants to conduct research and carry out special studies on habitat quality, carrying capacity etc Improving existing environ-mental education centre Creating awareness aboutwildlife conservation among local peopleCapacity building amongstaff, more so at field level.


Ownership Statement | Form IV1. Place of publication: Annexe No.5, Bikaner House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi 1100112. Periodicity of its publication - Bi-monthly3. Printer’s Name - Inder Mohan Singh Kathuria, Nationality - Indian,Address: C-30, Defence Colony, New Delhi - 1100244. Publisher’s Name - Inder Mohan Singh Kathuria, Nationality - Indian, Address: C-30, Defence Colony, New Delhi - 1100245. Editor’s Namer - Dr Rajesh Gopal, Member-Secretary, NTCA, Nationality- Indian, Address: D-1/13 Bharti Nagar, New Delhi - 1100036. Names and address of individuals who own the newspaper - National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA)Ministry of Environment and Forests, Annexe No. 5, Bikaner House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi - 110011I, Inder Mohan Singh Kathuria, hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.Date; April 30, 2012Signature of PublisherSd

Nagarjunasagar Andhra 73.92 56.983 94.91 155.645 154.406Namdapha Arunachal 30.00 136.852 14.62 96.875 75.00Pakke Arunachal 80.25 109.319 48.86 101.058 161.786Kaziranga Assam 0.00 306.792 165.00 1050.38 426.917Manas Assam 60.00 740.795 0.00 395.504 479.62Nameri Assam 35.61 44.793 21.59 63.588 40.972Valmiki Bihar 98.32 49.673 8.00 158.355 172.193Achanakmar Chhattisgarh 0.00 68.55 1193.5 1556.085 494.586Indravati Chhattisgarh 35.23 49.37 42.15 50.382 106.13Udanti-Sitanadi Chhattisgarh 0.00 51.95 103.05 207.258 102.01Palamau Jharkhand 45.16 115.377 110.735 130.616 156.347Bandipur Karnataka 974.53 114.565 164.197 367.656 213.950Bhadra Karnataka 185.19 158.067 128.087 154.114 215.8822Dandeli Anshi Karnataka 0.00 226.36 144.37 203.823 159.204Nagarhole Karnataka 0.00 190.847 210.818 934.466 1123.133BRT Karnataka 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 118.48Periyar Kerala 153.24 170.35 151.8 209.330 261.57Parambikulam Kerala 0.00 96.74 129.36 114.130 168.2Bandhavgarh MP 499.46 1814.949 159.96 2292.125 2313.237Kanha MP 270.42 1638.283 280.18 575.960 1969.67Panna MP 1822.85 2108.938 175.895 390.696 284.796Pench MP 220.85 169.091 158.32 236.430 191.530Sanjay Dubri MP 0.00 74.506 145.84 203.451 92.673Satpura MP 162.36 1192.775 1502.371 264.160 310.806Kuno Palpur MP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 190.000Melghat Maharashtra 138.37 180.939 155.185 2137.088 973.579Pench Maharashtra 71.50 71.18 75.872 102.715 280.818Tadoba-Andheri Maharashtra 85.85 159.006 131.82 494.887 2320.549Sahyadri Maharashtra 0.00 0.00 5.00 54.374 47.396Dampa Mizoram 82.90 241.45 2171.00 187.690 225.288Satkosia Orissa 0.00 75.00 127.73 72.834 118.408Similipal Orissa 43.28 550.99 42.35 742.456 436.668Ranthambhore Rajasthan 223.45 808.86 10560 250.325 0.600Sariska Rajasthan 187.23 1900.09 134.17 2118.600 66.610KMTR Tamil Nadu 45.40 222.371 138.455 119.270 209.825Mudumalai Tamil Nadu 0.00 243.55 51.854 269.792 191.583Anamalai Tamil Nadu 0.00 224.885 50.245 131.725 204.556Corbett Uttarakhand 202.01 462.85 241.705 339.945 399.760Buxa West Bengal 106.79 67.64 38.58 120.873 135.660Sundarbans West Bengal 201.88 160.754 259.97 381.610 22.000Dudhwa UP 134.89 392.513 414.437 382.462 446.126

RESERVE-WISE RELEASE IN 11TH PLAN*

Tiger Reserve State 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

All figures in Rs lakh; rounded off to 3rd decimal* Under the ongoing centrally sponsored scheme of Project Tiger

Mitigating man-tiger conflict (UP) 0.00 25.00 0.00 25.000 0.0000

Amount Released for 2nd All India Tiger Estimation 0.00 0.00 401.012 28.77 0.0000

TOTAL 6270.94 15473.00 20153.00 17872.50 16062.522

Published and printed by Inder Mohan Singh Kathuria on behalf of National Tiger Conservation Authority. Published at Annexe No 5, Bikaner House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi - 110011 and

printed at Astha Packaging, 122 DSISC Sheds, Okhla Phase I, New Delhi - 110020

DELENG/2009/30636STRIPES | BI-MONTHLY OUTREACH JOURNAL OF NATIONAL TIGER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY,A STATUTORY BODY UNDER MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

VOLUME THREE FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION ISSUE THREE

MP Ecotourism Board

Stripes Vol 3 Issue 3

Documents

Transcript of Stripes Vol 3 Issue 3