New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday passed a judgment allowing a proposed tiger safari project in Jim Corbett Tiger Reserve to go through, but with certain conditions that include displaying only orphaned, injured, or tigers that have been involved in human-animal conflict.
In response to a petition filed in 2022 by lawyer and environmental activist Gaurav Bansal, the Supreme Court directed that the tiger safari proposed in Corbett in Uttarakhand should only come up in the buffer zone, and cannot have animals from other zoos being brought to be displayed in enclosures.
The proposed tiger safari in question is different from the jungle safari already functioning within the reserve.
The order, a copy of which is with ThePrint, does not completely ban tiger safaris in Corbett but only decides which animals can be displayed in this proposed project and where, opposing the 2019 National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) guidelines. The Court also said that for establishing tiger safaris in any protected areas, the final authority must rest with the NTCA and not the Central Zoo Authority (CZA), as the 2019 guidelines currently state.
While emphasising the importance of ‘ecocentrism’ as opposed to ‘anthropocentric’ conservation in India’s tiger reserves, the SC also directed the Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) to create a committee to look into the establishment of tiger safaris in buffer areas and the “effective management” and promotion of “ecotourism” in these facilities.
On his part, Bansal called the ruling “historic”.
“The court has applied the public trust doctrine in India and expressly observed the need for conservation of tiger reserves. For the first time, the Honourable Court has deprecated the 2019 guidelines, which were tourism-centric,” he told ThePrint.
Zoologists and animal conservation experts, however, remain sceptical about the idea of a tiger safari, believing it could harm wildlife habitats. “The purpose of nature reserves like Corbett Park, which occupy less than 2 percent of our land, is to protect wild tiger populations and their habitat in natural conditions. Their objective is not at all to host expensive distractions like captive collections or hospitals of injured tigers,” Ullas Karanth, a wildlife biologist and Fellow of the Indian Academy of Sciences, told ThePrint.
Calling such tiger safaris “unscientific”, he said that such proposals are being made by “ignorant bureaucrats, including the NTCA” who don’t have the “ecological understanding of the issues involved”.
“It is unfortunate that the apex court, instead of seeking advice from qualified scientists, is passing these sorts of ill-advised orders without possessing any ecological expertise,” he added.
What are tiger safaris
First proposed by the NTCA in 2012, tiger safaris are fenced enclosures meant to keep tigers within or near existing reserves. These are supposed to be no less than 60 hectares in size and can be established in tiger reserves that have reached 100 percent of their carrying capacity — that is, its maximum possible population.
These safaris are aimed at reducing tourism pressure on critical tiger habitats and were intended to come up alongside interpretation and awareness centers in buffer or fringe areas of tiger reserves.
An example of this is the Gir Devalia Safari Park in Gujarat for lions. Significantly, while the 2016 NTCA guidelines explicitly forbade obtaining animals from a zoo exhibit for the safari, that rule was changed in 2019 to say it is the central government with approval from the Central Zoo Authority that will decide what animals are to be kept there.
The Supreme Court has now held that amendment to be “totally contrary to the purpose of tiger conservation”. It also said that since tiger safaris fall under the concept of in situ conservation, the final authority on them should rest with the NTCA.
What the court said
In its 159-page ruling, the court held that while the tiger safari being constructed near the Pakhrau range already has the in-principle approval from the NTCA and the CZA, its selection didn’t follow protocols. According to Clause 10 of the 2016 guidelines, a committee of NTCA, CZA, and forest department members along with a conservationist should select the area meant for the safari, the court said.
Clause 10 of the 2016 guidelines set down criteria for setting up tiger safaris.
The court said that since the safari was 80 percent complete, the court would allow it. “Though technically there will be non-compliance with the requirement of clause 10 of the 2016 Guidelines, in fact, since most of the authorities mentioned therein are ad idem, we do not wish to interfere with the decision to establish the ‘Tiger Safari’ at Pakhrau,” the SC order said.
Experts, however, are worried about the effect that such enclosures would have on the animals. Previous studies have shown that some tigers and other big cats in enclosures show a decline in positive welfare markers. According to a 2014 study, for instance, tigers’ pacing behaviour is significantly affected by the size of their enclosure.
“I am appalled that these so-called ‘safaris’ in which naturally solitary cat species are packed in like sheep at high densities under pathetic conditions are now being officially promoted as ‘big cat safaris’ in India,” Karanth said.
Prerna Bindra, another wildlife conservationist, agrees. The idea of a safari inside a tiger reserve is antithetical to the intent of a protected area, said Bindra, who has served on the Uttarakhand State Board for Wildlife and the National Board for Wildlife.
“A safari involves first the destruction of the forests, and vegetation and then massive constructions and infrastructural changes. It will bring in roads, tourists, (and) waste. A safari is not a ‘forestry’ activity, nor is it conservation,” she said.
The focus should be on conserving natural habitats and ecology, “not getting obsessed with safaris and zoos where animals are captive”, she said.
“By constructing a tiger safari, you’re altering the ecology of the area, destroying the natural habitats of not just tigers but other endangered wildlife — including a diversity of birds, reptiles, and other life forms,” she told ThePrint.
(Edited by Uttara Ramaswamy)
Also Read: Is India’s Project Tiger going off script? Big cat deaths from Corbett to Pench to Kanha