Politics and Conservation

Sifting through headlines on BBC about a year ago, I came across a report stating that about 800 species of plants and animals are under the threatened of extinction, unless something is done soon. And this report came at the wake of the discovery of a new species in Borneo. Most of these species were identified to be from the tropics, the most diversity-rich part of the globe, and in some places, the report said, it would cost less that $1,000 per year to save them. If the cost of saving our wildlife was so low, then how is it that we came to lose so much in the first place? And still losing at a very alarming rate.

All the 595 sites that were identified is situated in what the West (and we) call the Third World countries. What it would cost the common man to spend his life in these places is way more than $1000. Man-animal conflict. That's what we ecologists call it and till date we cannot come up with any solution that would eradicate this problem once and for all. Community involvement and education, sustainable management and all that jazz. It has done something to reduce the pressure, yet the problem exists, the solution far from reality. We sit at our desks and analyze the problem, but we don't live with the problem.

The latest amendment to India's Wildlife Protection Act allows for people to settle within the limits of protected areas. This came about after the huge loss of the tiger population from Rajasthan. Though I haven't seen the amendment yet, reports say that people will now not be asked to relocate from threatened areas to enable the protection of the animals the areas are meant to protect. The way I see it, India has yet to make advances in its infrastructure as far as the forest and wildlife protection goes. There is not enough money-power and man power to save wildlife. Allowing the local people to settle in the protected areas will only increase the threat.

Lets be practical here, the people who settle in these areas (other than the tribals who have been dependent on the forest for eons) are agriculturists, people still living under the poverty line. Encouraging them to involve themselves in the protection of the forest assets is a dream that will blow up in our faces. They will need the forest products to sustain themselves and then comes the threat of poaching. The main reason that the tigers disappeared was because the local people were invloved. Poachers pay them for the help rendered. Money is an excellent lure for the people who barely have enough to feed their families. Conversationists and activists are now trying to get the government not to pass the act, but it remains to be seen who the winner will be in this situation. Frankly, no matter what we try, there doesn't seem to be a scenario where wildlife comes out the winner.

Technorati tags: extinction, new species, protected areas, Wildlife Protection Act, conservation