To,
1. The Member Secretary
National Tiger Conservation Authority
New Delhi.
2. Director
Wildlife Institute of India Chandrabani
Dehradun-248001.
Subject: Safeguards needed for protection of the tiger and its habitat and corridors through appropriate mitigation measures along the stretch of NH7 passing through the Kanha-Pench and Kanha-Nagzira corridors in the state of Maharashtra.
Dear Sirs,
As you are aware, the Honourable Supreme Court of India in its judgment of 20th January, 2016 in SLP No. 19567-19573 of 2015 has, inter alia ordered, that: “…it is evident that the question of safeguards is still open before the High Court... The High Court will we hope and trust examine the issue after hearing all the stake holders..."
As key stake holders in respect of tiger conservation, we, the undersigned individuals and/or organizations, have been collectively involved either as scientists or conservationists, and many of us have served on various statutory and expert committees, including the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL), National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), Forest Advisory Committee (FAC), Wildlife Institute of India (WII) etc. for several decades. We therefore deem it our duty to flag some extremely crucial issues with regard to ecological, legal and policy aspects of this matter in order to ensure that, as the statutory and scientific authority on behalf of the Government, you will act with utmost responsibility to uphold the interests of tigers and other wildlife, which you are duty bound to protect.
Ecological Issues:
The NTCA and the WII have produced three major scientific reports, which have documented the ecological importance of the Kanha-Pench and Kanha-Nagzira landscapes, and the corridors connecting them. We are reproducing below some of the key findings and conclusions from these 3 reports as well as some other significant studies -
1) Status of tiger, co-predators and prey in India" (TR-08/001 pp-151): KanhaPench Landscape: This is one of the best landscapes (16,000 km2) that exists today with two source populations of tigers connected as a potential meta-population.
2) Status of Tiger, Co-predators and Prey in India, 2010 (TR2011/003 pp-302):This corridor system has gained much public attention in recent times due to the issues related to the widening of National Highway No. 7….The current viability of this corridor is highlighted by the distribution of tigers, other large carnivores and prey species across the corridor habitat. Development projects need to ensure appropriate mitigation measures when implemented within corridors so as not to act as barriers to wildlife while being constructed as well as being completed.
3) Prioritizing tiger conservation through landscape genetics and habitat linkages (Yumnam et al, 2015): A few individuals in Pench had cross-assignments with Kanha suggesting gene flow between these two population clusters substantiated by a functional habitat corridor between Pench and Kanha..........Extensive annual camera-trapping since 2006 has recorded tigers dispersing between Pench and Kanha, a geographic distance of more than 150 km.......The intervening forest patch between Kanha and Pench not only served as a movement corridor but also had some resident tigers as evidenced from camera trap data.............This genetic evidence is further supported by field observations where a sub-adult male tiger photo-captured in Pench tiger reserve in 2006 was observed to be a territorial breeding male in Kanha tiger reserve in 2010.....The data and analyses show that tigers likely disperse between Kanha-Pench.....The best patches of contiguous forested habitat are present in the corridor between Pench and Kanha, which extends eastward to Achanakmar.......Corridors identified herein need to be given legal status, and mitigated with appropriate green infrastructure for development projects within corridor habitats so as to ensure continued gene flow between populations. The most functional corridor was observed between Kanha and Pench, which has evidence of prey and offers the possibility of resident tigers in some of its larger forest patches. However, infrastructural development in the form of adding lanes to national highways and widening of railway lines, threaten to form permanent barriers even within this corridor unless proper safeguards and mitigation measures are built into these development projects.
4) Connecting Tiger Populations for Long Term Conservation (TR2014-02): This corridor (Kanha Pench) is an example of how two source populations of tigers can be managed as a single meta-population. There is evidence from telemetry and camera trapping to show that tigers regularly use this corridor to move between Kanha and Pench. The corridor at places is sufficiently wide so as to support prey species and patches of habitat that serve as temporary refuges for dispersing tigers. However, the corridor has come into focus due to the proposed widening of the National Highway- 7 to six lanes. If permissions are granted for such activities then appropriate mitigation measures need to be put in place to safeguard the functionality of this corridor for tigers and other wildlife such as gaur and wild dog.
5) Lifeline for tigers- Status and conservation of the Kanha Pench Corridor (WWF India): Records the presence of highly endangered species such as tigers, gaur, 3 | P a g e sambar and chital and describes the area as a viable corridor. The report also describes the National Highway 7 as a threat and describes details of road kills of endangered species.
6) Connectivity of tiger (Panthera tigris) populations in the human influenced forest mosaic of central India (Joshi et al, 2013): “While these are broad generalities, our results (Figures 3, 4) re-establish the functionality of the Kanha - Pench corridor, where expansion of a national highway is currently being proposed. With more than 13% of sampled individuals dispersing within the landscape in the last decade, any ‘developmental activity' could hamper connectivity at a large scale.
7) Status of Tiger and Leopard in the Nagpur Forest Circle Phase IV, Maharashtra, Technical Report - 2015, Wildlife Conservation Trust (WCT) & Maharashtra Forest Department: That the Nagpur Forest Division which forms part of the Kanha Pench and Kanha Nagzira corridors has a resident breeding population of tigers with a tiger density of 0.91/100 sq. kms.
8) Status of Tiger and Leopard in the buffer zone of Pench Tiger Reserve Madhya Pradesh (Phase IV), Wildlife Conservation Trust (WCT) & Madhya Pradesh Forest Department: That the Rukhad and Ari Ranges (buffer zone of Pench TR-MP) which forms part of the Kanha Pench and Kanha Nagzira corridors has a resident breeding population of tigers with a tiger density of 1.38/100 sq. kms.
9) Forest corridors maintain historical gene flow in a tiger meta-population in the highlands of central India (Sharma et al, 2014): The highest contemporary gene flow is between Pench and Kanha". The study goes on to say that “We found a significant reduction in gene flow between the tiger reserve pairs with degraded corridors (Kanha - Satpura, Kanha -Melghat and Melghat -Pench), whereas there is no significant change in gene flow for those tiger reserves that are still connected by forest corridors (Kanha -Pench, Satpura- Melghat and Pench- Satpura.. The functional status of corridors in central India is declining rapidly owing to fragmentation, mining, road widening, railroad construction and urbanization. We found that the Kanha-Pench corridor still has a few tigers…
Policy:
1) In the Environmental Guidelines - Roads, Sensitive Habitats and Wildlife produced by WII it has been documented that “roads are commonly associated both directly and indirectly with deforestation and habitat fragmentation. Wildlife barriers imposed by roads inhibit movements, change home ranges, isolate populations and reduce genetic diversity and the ability of populations to remain in equilibrium, all of which may lead to altered population dynamics and considerable ecosystem losses".
2) In the “Recommendations of the NBWL Sub-Committee on Guidelines for Roads in Protected Areas", the sub-committee recommended that “for roads within and in the vicinity (within 1 km. radial distance) of protected areas, the following fundamental principles must be followed in order of priority: Avoidance, Re-alignment and Restoration. It further says that “the status quo of the roads passing through National Parks and Core Critical Tiger Habitats (CTH) shall remain the same. Where roads 4 | P a g e approaching / passing by National Parks/Core-Critical Tiger Reserve/Wildlife Sanctuary are within a radius of 1 km thereof, or within the Eco-Sensitive Zone, whichever of the two is lesser, would be treated on same basis/guidelines as are applicable to the Protected Areas category that it is in proximity of."
Detrimental impacts of linear infrastructure: The dis-proportionately large (as compared to the small amounts of forest land diverted for non-forest use) and highly detrimental impacts of linear infrastructure on fragmentation of forests are well documented in the following documents of the Standing Committee of the NBWL and the draft policy of the Ministry of Environment and Forests:
1) Guidelines for linear infrastructure intrusions innatural areas: roads and powerlines, National Board for Wildlife, Ministry of Environment and Forests, India FIRST DRAFT (10 October 2011)
2) Framing ecologically sound policy on linear intrusions affectingwildlife habitatsBackground paper for the National Board for Wildlife
3) Draft Eco-Friendly Measures to Mitigate Impacts of Linear Infrastructure on Wildlife, Draft prepared by Wildlife Institute of India upon the instructions of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, New Delhi
Importance of the Kanha Pench Corridor has increased over the years: The importance of the Kanha Pench Corridor has only increased during the last 8 years when efforts to mitigate the impacts of the expansion of NH7 have started.
1) Mansinghdeo Wildlife Sanctuary has been declared.
2) Mansinghdeo Wildlife Sanctuary added to Pench Tiger Reserve, Maharashtra.
3) Rukhad and Ari Ranges added to buffer zone of Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh.
4) Kanha Pench Corridor becomes the first corridor to have its own management plans prepared by the Government of Madhya Pradesh
Law and Policy
5) Kanha Pench corridor gets legal protection under Section 38-O(1)(g) and 38-V(3)(b) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
6) The National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016) released by the then Prime Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee at Chapter xiii states that roads are planned in such a manner that all National Parks and Sanctuaries are by-passed and even wildlife corridors are either avoided or mitigative measures undertaken.
All available literature in peer reviewed journals and public domains support the need for large, connected landscapes, and scientific data shows that small, isolated populations of tigers and other endangered species are highly susceptible to extinction.
The increased importance of the Kanha Pench Landscape over the years only justifies additional investments in world class mitigation measures using the principles of Smart Green Infrastructure.
Reduction in mitigation measures without any scientific basis:
1) With regard to the mitigation measures to be taken to enable landscape scale connectivity for tigers, gaur, wild dogs, leopards, sloth bears and indeed many other highly endangered species, the Wildlife Institute of India had prepared a report in May 2012. This report had recommended 10 additional underpasses totalling 5.5 kilometres in length and of 7 meters height each.
2) In June 2012, the NHAI raised queries about the need for 7 meter height of the underpasses. The Wildlife Institute of India submitted a report in July 2012 giving a detailed explanations justifying the 7 meters height of the underpasses. However, the report has a table illustrating various dimensions of underpasses while using a height of 5 meters in the calculations.
3) Later, due to objections raised by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) that the cost was prohibitive, a committee headed by the APCCF (Wildlife East) and comprising of other officials from the Maharashtra Forest Department, NHAI and the Wildlife Institute of India submitted a report in January 2015 on mitigation measures which recommended 9 underpasses totalling 2.7 kilometres in length and having a height of 4.5 meters each.
4) However, objections from the NHAI that the cost was prohibitive still continued and the Wildlife Institute of India and the National Tiger Conservation Authority conducted a re-survey of the area and submitted another report in May 2015 which recommended 9 underpasses totaling to 2.2. Kilometres in length and having a height of 5 meters each.
From the above sequence of events it can be seen that the mitigation measures have been serially diluted (numbers, height and length) without offering any scientific explanation for the reductions in mitigation measures. Scientific merit has been completely ignored while making these recommendations.
Further, the May 2012 report is based on a comprehensive understanding of the area based on a 4 year study conducted by the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) itself after a wide consultation with various stakeholders. On the contrary, the May 2015 report is based on a rapid 15 day survey in the summer season only and has failed to consult all stakeholders. The May 2015 report identifies crossing zones heavily used by wild animals, however, the recommended underpasses barely have any overlap with the crossing zones.
The said actions of the Wildlife Institute of India and the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) raise serious and fundamental questions of scientific integrity and upholding the law in the absence of any data supporting the reduction in mitigation measures.
If any dilution of mitigation measures contained in the May 2012 report is now recommended, which itself would be a major compromise as compared to re-alignment of NH7 from Nagpur to Seoni via Chhindwara (as per the guidelines of the NBWL SubCommittee on Roads, the NTCA itself in its submissions to the CEC and the subsequent CEC report), it would fly against the spirit of Good Governance promised by the Government; further the very credibility of the Wildlife Institute of India as a scientific institution will be at stake, nationally and internationally. Changing scientific recommendations without any credible data to the contrary, would only lead to the inevitable conclusion that it is being done based on political compulsions, which no respectable scientific institution should allow.
Furthermore, cost is not a constraint for mitigation measures: As you may also be aware, the NHAI has now stated on record that funds for mitigation measures are not a constraint and that the NHAI is willing to save each and every species. Please see the news article at the link pasted here where the media has reported the statement of Dr. B. Mukhopadhyay, DGM (Environment), NHAI stating that funds are not a constraint.
Further, when very long bridges in various cities and across major rivers such as the Ganga and the Brahmaputra are built at great cost, no one ever questions the cost.
Now that cost is not a constraint for the NHAI, we feel that the recommendations of the May 2012 report will be the basic minimum for protection of the corridors. At the same time traffic can also safely move along a 4 lane highway.
We therefore strongly urge you to:
1. Recommend to the Nagpur Bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court that the mitigation measures as contained in the original May 2012 report prepared by the Wildlife Institute of India are absolutely necessary and non-negotiable;
2. Address the issue where there is no overlap of the proposed mitigation measures with the identified animal crossing zones.
3. Recommend that the existing road below the recommended underpasses be decommissioned and the habitat be restored to natural conditions to allow wild animals to use the corridor in an unhindered manner.
4. Recommend to the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court that the State of Maharashtra comply with the provisions of Section 29, 33, 38-O (1) (g) and 38- V(3)(b) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
5. The NTCA and WII should note that the NH7 issue has resulted in an unfortunate fait accompli situation. We sincerely suggest that in all such future cases, the principle of avoidance must be followed as per the “Recommendations of the NBWL Sub-Committee on Guidelines for Roads in Protected Areas".
With regards
Signatories
1) Ajay Dubey, PRAYATNA
