Environment

When conservation efforts collide with tribal rights in Maharashtra

·        A Public Interest Litigation in the Bombay High Court, originally filed in 2013, has gathered momentum over the issue of critical wildlife habitat in the past couple of years.

·        As the High Court enquired about government action, the state forest department declared 54 sites as critical wildlife habitats, in an effort to protect endangered wildlife.

·        However, activists and lecturers allege that there was undue haste and several violations on this implementation.

·        Local groups say that their claims underneath the Forest Rights Act are but to be settled and this move of affirming the sites as important natural world habitats under thesame act will come in the way of fair and just treatment to the tribals.

·        About Critical Wildlife Habitats – CWLHs are meant to be areas of national parks and wildlife sanctuaries that are required to be kept as inviolate for the purpose of wildlife conservation (not just tigers).

·        CWLH mandatorily requires agreement of woodland rights below FRA.

·        The two processes are, thus, independent of each other where the settlement of forest rights comes at different stages.

·        As envisaged inside the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, Critical Wildlife Habitats are to be declared via the Central Government within the Ministry of Environment and Forests after a process of consultation by using Expert Committees.

·        History of Critical Wildlife Habitat Guidelines

·        In order to inform a CWH, the Act requires kingdom governments to set up that the presence of right-holders is causing irreversible damage to wildlife and their habitats, and that co-lifestyles among rights holders and wildlife turned into not an affordable option.

·        In 2007 and 2011, two versions of the guidelines for notifying CWHs were drafted by the MoEF&CC (then MoEF), but withdrawn amidst lack of consensus between foresters and forest rights groups.

·        The result was that after more than a decade of FRA’s existence, not a single CWH had been notified, creating uproar from wildlife conservation groups.

·        In March 2017, the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) issuedan order to deny forest rights in critical tiger habitats (core areas of tiger reserves) in the absence of CWH guidelines.

·        MoEF&CC finally issued CWH guidelines in 2018 Notifying CWHs: Key features of guidelines

·        The Chief Wildlife Warden of a state will notify an Expert Committee for the cause of identification of crucial flora and fauna habitats (CWH) in a national park or sanctuary.

·        The Expert Committee will pick out regions within country-wide parks and sanctuaries, based totally on scientific and goal criteria applicable to the covered place, required to be stored inviolated for the motive of natural world conservation.

·        The Expert Committee shall issue a public note at the aim to inform CWH.

·        The public observe shall consist of details of regions required to be saved inviolate, criteria followed for CWH identity, the implication of the notification on current rights, and all alternatives ofresettlement and rehabilitation schemes, if applicable.

·        The Expert Committee shall carry out open consultations with all stakeholders, and the proceedings of the consultations, especially the objections, will be documented appropriately.

·        The committee will submit the CWH proposal to the Chief Wildlife Warden.

·        The decision on the proposal will take by the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife.

·        A MoTA representative would be invited during the deliberation of the proposal by the standing committee.

·        Following the committee’s advice, the notification of CWH will be posted inside the respectable gazette.

·        Critical Tiger Habitats Critical ‘tiger’ habitats (CTHs), additionally referred to as center regions of tiger reserves—are recognized underneath the Wild Life Protection Act (WLPA), 1972 based totally on clinical evidence that “such areas are required to be stored as inviolate for the purpose of tiger conservation, without affecting the rights of the Scheduled Tribes or such different wooded area dwellers”.

·        The notification of CTH is done by the state government in consultation with the expert committee constituted for the purpose.

·        ‘Inviolate’ is a preferred time period used to suggest no human agreement and usage.

·        This necessarily implies that organizing CTHs as inviolate areas calls for relocation of people living in such regions.