JPAM UPDATE 19, February 1999

CONTENTS

EDITORIAL

NEWS FROM INDIAN STATES

Andhra Pradesh

Assam

Goa

Gujarat

Jammu & Kashmir

Maharashtra

Orissa

Rajasthan

Uttar Pradesh

NATIONAL NEWS FROM INDIA

Teesta canal proposal dropped
Two new protected area categories in the amended Wildlife Act
Intervention in WWF Supreme Court case
Petition on people's rights in PAs
New green norms for the location of industry
WWF Tiger Conservation Programme
Obituary
Six New Tiger Reserves
Revision of National Wildlife Action Plan
Rationalisation of protected area boundaries
National Workshop on Ecodocumentation
Field coordinators needed

INTERNATIONAL NEWS

Nepal

WHAT'S AVAILABLE?

Regional Action Plan for Protected Areas in South Asia
Proceedings of the Workshop on 'Biodiversity conservation in Maharashtra' -- Vision Beyond 2000
Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple Wildlife Sanctuary: Natural History, Biodiversity and Conservation
The Wilderness News Letter
Andhari Tiger Sanctuary (Maharashtra): A Case for People's Participation in the Management of Protected Areas

CORRESPONDENCE

EDITORIAL

1998 has been the year of poaching exposes. We had, in fact, a good mind to nominate Salman Khan for the Unintended Conservationist of the Year award: his misdeed, and the actions of the Bishnois, made poaching a national issue, and suddenly forest officers, NGOs, the media, and the judiciary seemed to take the matter more seriously than before (not that some of them were not doing all they could earlier, but their efforts appeared to take on a more effective tone). Whether it will make a major difference in the long run or not is unclear, but at least the nation took notice.
In another flurry of activity, the Ministry of Environment and Forests announced the setting up of two expert committees: one to revise the 1983 National Wildlife Action Plan (NWAP), and the other to recommend rationalisation of boundaries of protected areas all over India (see NATIONAL NEWS FROM INDIA). Both could be significant for the future of protected areas and for wildlife conservation in India, if the committees carry out their tasks with seriousness and caution.
The 1983 NWAP had set the stage for a series of initiatives on wildlife conservation, including strengthening the PA network and making it more representative of India's natural habitats, expanding conservation education and training, and others. However, it was somewhat weak on how to make conservation more participatory, though one of its outcomes was an effort by the Indian Board for Wildlife to frame an action plan for involving citizens in conservation. This latter document lacked a critical focus on making local communities and other citizens key players in conservation. It is hoped that the new committee will be fully cognizant of current realities in and around our conservation areas (including PAs), and will give communities and citizens a central role, with clear rights and responsibilities.
The exercise to rationalise PA boundaries is as significant. Many of our PAs have been declared with arbitrariness, based on administrative convenience, incomplete knowledge, ignorance of ground realities, or even commercial interest. In Maharashtra, for instance, there are PAs which include considerable human populations inside while leaving out adjacent forest areas which are sparsely populated. Some re-organisation of the boundaries would considerably reduce the people-PA conflicts, while perhaps including important wildlife habitat so far left out.
However, this exercise must be undertaken with great caution. This is especially so, given the current process of settlement of people's rights in PAs (see commentaries in previous JPAM Updates), in which some district collectors may be keen to simply knock off large chunks of PAs where the settlement process is too much of a headache for them (see Stop Press below). If portions are left out of PAs simply because of human habitation (as was done in the case of Melghat Sanctuary), we may be opening up these areas to more destructive forces which would gobble up both wildlife and local communities.
We have been arguing that instead of this, we should move towards a flexible system of PA categories and zoning, which would authorise sustainable resource use while maintaining jointly determined levels of conservation values. It would have been wiser to have set up this committee after the promulgation of the revised Wild Life (Protection) Act, which, among other things, has two additional categories of PAs (Community Reserves and Conservation Reserves). Many areas, which now run the risk of being left out of the PA network altogether, could have been converted into such categories, where communities would have had control while ensuring conservation.
Stop-press! S.P. Sharma reports in the Tribune (19/1/99), that the Himachal Pradesh authorities are proposing partial denotification of several PAs: Great Himalayan National Park for a hydro-electric project, and Rupi, Churdhar, and other sanctuaries because they are "heavily loaded with rights of private people"! The latter are in relation to the infamous WWF case, in which the Supreme Court, in which the Court has ordered completion of settlement procedures within one yearwith no guidelines for how to go about doing this.(see past issues of JPAM Update). This is exactly as we had predicted more than a year agoin their desire to rid PAs of people's presence, conservationists are ending up destabilising the entire PA network.

NEWS FROM INDIAN STATES

ANDHRA PRADESH

ASSAM
Floods devastate many sanctuaries in Assam
While the devastation caused in the Kaziranga National Park due to the recent floods received worldwide coverage and financial assistance (see JPAM Update 18), many smaller sanctuaries that were also ravaged went unnoticed. 14 other sanctuaries, including Pobitara, Orang, Dibru Saikhowa and Burha-Chapori, were badly affected where many roads, bridges and forest camps within the sanctuaries were washed away. Senior wildlife officials have said that financial aid for these sanctuaries is being made available, however it is not known what the extent of this aid is nor the reconstruction activities it is being used for.
Source: Indian Express, quoted on email from Nalin M. dated 25/10/98 on nathistory-india@lists.princeton.edu.
Contact:        Chief Wildlife Warden, Assam, RG Barua Road, (Chandmari), Guwahati 710 024, Assam.

Tragedy in Dibru-Saikhowa Wildlife Sanctuary
Narayan Sharma, the Range Officer of Guijan Forest Range of the Dibru Saikhowa Wildlife Sanctuary, was trampled to death by an elephant at the Nalani Forest Reserve near Pangeri, in Tinsukia district. The accident happened on 2 November 1998. A wild elephant in the area had terrorised people, killing some persons. Mr. Sharma was accompanying the expert who was to tranquilise the elephant prior to its capture. However the tranquiliser was not effective, and the elephant became alert and trampled Mr Sharma. The death of Mr. Sharma has been mourned by many in the field of environment and wildlife conservation. He was, in particular, very keen on gaining the support of local communities for conservation, and was helping them with various inputs.
Source: E-mail from Krys Kazmierczak on nahistory-india@lists.princeton.edu, dated 2.12.98.
Contact: Chief Wildlife Warden, Assam (address as above)

GOA

GUJARAT

Satellite monitoring of forest fires in Gir

JAMMU & KASHMIR

Golf course inside national park!

MAHARASHTRA
Tiger Safari set up in the Sanjay Gandhi National Park
A Tiger Safari was inaugurated in the Sanjay Gandhi National Park on the 20th of November by the Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray. The safari is spread over an area of 50 acres, surrounded by a ten feet high wired fence in Krishnagiri, the tourist zone inside the Park. The safari has 6 tigers, including two white tigers. The Chief Minister of Maharashtra announced that the state would donate Rs.1 crore through the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) to the Safari that would cost about Rs.80 lakhs a year for maintenance.
Earlier, in the month of October a petition was filed in the Mumbai High Court by the animal welfare organisation 'Ahimsa', seeking to restrain the Sanjay Gandhi National Park from using its land for conducting any non-forest or commercial activity such as setting up of an open air theatre, tiger safari, tourism zones, guest houses, botanical gardens and construction of roads. Following the petition the National Park authorities had put off the inauguration of the Tiger Safari within the National Park for about a month. The final outcome of the case is not known.
It is a wonder that state governments which otherwise complain about lack of funds for conservation programmes, find such large amounts for what is surely not a high priority conservation activity. The whole affair sounds more like a political gimmick (projecting the Shiv Sena's symbol rather than the real tiger and its plight) than a serious conservation programme.
Source: 'Tiger Safari at national park challenged' Indian Express. 7/10/98.
'A new Tiger Reserve to come up near Nagpur' Indian Express. 21/11/98
Contact:        DFO, Sanjay Gandhi Rashtriya Udyan, Borivilli (E), Bombay 400 066, Maharashtra.  
Pilgrimage in PAs to be controlled
On the occasion of Mahashivratri, 14^th February 1999, lakhs of pilgrims will visit sites within Maharashtra's PAs such as the Sanjay Gandhi National Park and Bhimashankar Sanctuary. In the past, this has caused considerable damage, through littering, noise, fuelwood use, etc. This year, the Forest Department, Anthropological Survey of India, and district authorities, have decided to restrict entry points, and prohibit pilgrims from carrying plastics, radios, cigarettes/bidis, etc. Certain areas, such as the Kanheri caves in SGNP, will have special restrictions. These steps were initiated at the suggestion of some Mumbai and Pune based NGOs.
Source: Anon. 1999. 'Restrictions for visitors to Kanheri Caves on Shivratri'. Times of India. 13/2/99.
Deshmukh, V. 1999. 'Bhimashankar dumps plastic'. Pune Newsline, Indian Express. 12/2/99.

ORISSA
Bhitarkanika under threat
Deforestation and poaching is adversely affecting the Bhitarkanika Sanctuary, the world famous home of nesting Olive Ridley turtles, the salt water crocodile and many migratory and resident birds. The Dangmal Forest Range has recorded the killing of about 125 animals (including 111 deer) in the last few months. According to a senior forest official, this number too may be far off the mark, adding that the Forest Department has been handicapped by covert support extended to illegal settlers and the prawn mafia.
No attempt has been made to evict the estimated 25,000 illegal settlers and prawn farms from the Sanctuary area despite a series of court orders and pressure from environmentalists worldwide. As a result the 380 sq km forest cover (including the 120 sq km mangrove forests, the second largest in the country after Sundarbans in West Bengal) has reduced drastically at an average rate of three sq. km. per annum. During the previous Janata Dal regime, revenue officials reportedly set afire a forest block for the migrants to settle.
Earlier, in a petition filed by the World Wide Fund for Nature, the Orissa High Court issued an order restraining the state government from leasing out forest land and water bodies or allowing aquaculture in the Bhitarkanika Sanctuary. The government was further directed to ensure that all the trawlers operating in the area use turtle extrusion devices, that no trawlers are allowed to enter the Gahirmatha (nesting) area, and encroachers are evicted. The state of implementation of these orders is not known.
Source: Anon. 1998. 'High Court restrains Orrisa government from leasing out forest land', Business Standard. 08/09/98.
Rajaram Satapathy. 1998. 'Orrisa sanctuary falls prey to poachers'. Times of India. 13/11/98.

Migratory birds flock to Nalaban Sanctuary

Demoiselle cranes in people's protected area

Public hearings at Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary and Sariska Tiger Reserve
Two protected areas of Rajasthan -- Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary and Sariska Tiger Reserve (consisting of a national park and a sanctuary) -- were witness to a unique event on 20-21 December, 1998. The villagers of the area, in association with the local NGO Tarun Bharat Sangh, and the Indian People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Environment, organised a public hearing on various issues related to these PAs. Justice G.S. Gupta, former Chief Justice of Himachal and of Tamil Nadu, presided over the hearings.
The issues about which villagers, forest officials, and NGOs deposed, included mining, impact of the PAs on local livelihoods, wildlife destruction, crop damage by wild animals, and conflicts between PA authorities and local people. Villagers argued that they should be allowed to remain staying inside the PAs, and they would in turn help to protect forests and wildlife. The forest officials agreed that villagers would continue to stay inside, except in the national park, and that the settlement of their rights would take their livelihood needs into full consideration.
A public hearing is obviously not the forum for immediate resolution of long-standing conflicts and tensions, but it can be a powerful first step. Justice Gupta's report is awaited, but already the hearings may have served a purpose: at Jamva Ramgarh, for instance, the categorical statement by the forest officials that no-one was going to be displaced from the Sanctuary, came as a pleasant surprise to villagers who had feared displacement.
A brief report prepared by Ashish Kothari, one of the members on the panel of persons invited for the hearings, can be obtained from the editorial address. For the detailed report, under preparation, contact the following:
Contact:        Rajendra Singh, Tarun Bharat Sangh, Bhikampura-Kishori, via Thanagazi, Dist. Alwar 301 002, Rajasthan. Tel: 01465-25 043.
Indian People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Environment, Jain High School, 5^th floor, 84, Samuel Street, Dongri, Mumbai 400 009, Maharashtra.

UTTAR PRADESH
Hastinapur Wildlife Sanctuary threatened
The endangered Swamp deer and some other species of the Hastinapur Wildlife Sanctuary are facing a serious threat due to the illegal cutting of khair (Acacia catechu), rosewood, and sandalwood trees, and the extraction of Typha grass. Typha grows on swampy ground and has an average height of 5 to 6 feet which is ideal for the Swamp deer. This grass is being illegally extracted as it is used as a raw material by the paper mills.
In September 1998, the Wildlife Warden of the Meerut-Agra region, R.D. Pathak, had seized two truckloads of Typha grass in the Muzzafarnagar and Meerut area and lodged an FIR under the Wild Life (Protection) Act. Photocopies of the permits that were recovered revealed that they had no date of issue or the validity period. Also, while the permit holder is allowed to cut not more than 22 quintals, Mr. Pathak alleged that more than 100 times that amount had been illegally extracted.
A survey conducted by the Zoology Department of the Aligarh University has reported that the breeding of the animals in the Sanctuary has been affected because of the increased extraction. It has recommended a complete ban on the cutting of Typha for commercial purposes. A big mafia gang which is reportedly operating in the area has extensive political, bureaucratic and underworld contacts, which has ensured the continuing of the illegal activities.
Sources:        D.S. Kunwar. 1998. 'Mafia Targets Sandalwood, Rosewood trees'. Times of India 26/10/98.
S. Raju. 1998. 'Sanctuary to Mafia may Cost Wildlife Deer'. Hindustan Times 30/10/98.
Contact:        Zoology Department, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202 002, Uttar Pradesh

NATIONAL NEWS FROM INDIA

Teesta canal proposal dropped
The proposal for the Joghipoga-Teesta-Farakka Link Canal which was to bring water to the Hoogly river to 'flush its silt load' has been dropped. However the associated power project has been cleared. The proposal has been dropped after the recommendations of  Dr. S Bhowmik,  Additional Director in the Ministry of Environment and Forests. In the Pre-feasibility Report (PFR) dated May 12 1998 he commented:
"considering the location of the proposed project in biologically rich ecosystems and the alignment of the canal through the Buxa Tiger Reserve, Gorumera National Park, Jaldapara and Chapramari Sanctuaries and Reserve Forest areas of Ripu, Dhunchi, Moraghat, Diana, Upper Tandu and Apanchand, we are prima facie of the view that the project may not be environmentally sound.
The proposed canal virtually bifurcates the protected areas which are home to large numbers of Schedule I animals like the tiger, leopard, elephant, and rhino. Moreover the habitat also harbours large number of smaller vertebrates and invertebrates which are facing extinction. The microflora and fauna are indigenous to this locality. In view of the above, it is being suggested that this proposal for bringing water to the Farakka may be dropped."
Source: Bittu Sahgal on email to nathistory-india@lists.princeton.edu dated 4/10/98
Contact:        Dr. S Bhowmik, Additional Director, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Paryavaran Bhavan, CGO Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110 003. Tel: 011-436 1316.
Two new protected area categories in the amended Wildlife Act
The Central Government has proposed to introduce two new categories of protected areas under the national wildlife legislation, and is preparing action plans for the forest wildlife and environment sectors, to be implemented over the next 15 to 20 years. This was stated by the Union Minister of Environment and Forests Mr. Suresh Prabhu at the 6th World Wilderness Congress held recently in Bangalore. The two new proposed categories are the Community Reserve and the Conservation Reserve.
Community Reserves would provide a legal recognition of voluntary wildlife conservation efforts by certain communities, such as the Bishnois in western parts of the country and some tribes in the north-east region. Conservation Reserves would allow conservation of identified natural resources in designated areas along with sustainable utilisation of the resources by local communities. However, these categories would only apply to new areas without affecting existing national parks and sanctuaries.
Sources:        Email from Nalin M. on nathistory-india@lists.princeton.edu, quoting an article from Indian Express, and subsequent discussions.
See also Bhatt, S. and Kothari, A. 1997. Protected Areas in India: Proposal for an Extended System of Categories. In Kothari, et.al. (eds.) Building Bridges for Conservation. IIPA, New Delhi.
Contact:        S.C. Sharma, Addl. IGF (WL), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Paryavaran Bhavan, CGO Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110 003. Tel: 011-436 2285; Fax: 011-436 3918.
Ashish Kothari, at the editorial address.

Intervention in WWF Supreme Court case
As reported in past issues of JPAM Update, the ongoing case on protected areas filed by WWF in the Supreme Court has caused a great deal of confusion in many parts of the country. This is because the Court's orders to all state governments to complete settlement of people's rights within one year, has in the case of many PAs resulted in a series of ad hoc, arbitrary actions by the district administration and forest officials.
People in most areas have mistaken the settlement notices to be orders for eviction. In other cases, District Collectors have appeared inclined to simply recommend a deletion of substantial portions of a PA rather than take on the headache of settling rights within it. In yet other cases, unrecorded rights (especially related to forests, such as collection of medicinal plants for home use) are not being taken into consideration at all while in some the people themselves are asking for denotification of the PA.
These and other anomalies are being pointed out in a proposed intervention by a number of groups working in PAs. This intervention is being filed by Kalpavriksh, SETU, Satya Shodh, Ekta Parishad, Astha, Shramjivi Unnayan, Society for Sustainable Development, T.N. Front for Adivasi Self-Rule, Sambhav Social Service Organisation, Samaj Parivartana Samudaya, Coorg Organisation for Rural Development, Nagarahole Budakattu Janara Hakku Sthapana Samithi, Visthapan Roko Andolan, and Samata.
The intervention petition argues that the settlement procedure is arbitrary and conflicting with constitutional rights, and seeks a more systematic, participatory process which would both safeguard the livelihood rights of local people as also ensure their participation in conservation of wildlife.
Contact:        Farhad Vania/Sanjay Upadhyay, Kalpavriksh, B 25 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024. Tel: 011-683 7921 (Farhad); 011-247 7375 (Sanjay).
Petition on people's rights in PAs
A case has been filed by CORD and others in the Supreme Court, based on hearings carried out by the Indian People's Tribual on Environment and Human Rights (IPT) at Sitanadi Sanctuary in Madhya Pradesh and Nagarhole National Park in Karnataka. The peition argues for the continuation of people's rights in forest areas and PAs, and for a stop to all displacement.

Contact:: Sarbani Sarkar, Centre for Law and Environment, 15B Gangaram Hospital Road, New Delhi 110060. Tel: 011-5744002.

New green norms for the location of industry
The Government of India has framed new rules prescribing the location criteria for setting up a new industrial project or for the expansion of an existing one. The new rules are a radical overhaul of the existing Siting Rules of 1985. Under these changes, setting up of new units of industries listed in Annexure I of the Siting Rules (broadly covering 29 categories of industries for which environment impact assessment is mandatory) stands barred if it is sought to be located within a 7 km belt from the periphery of areas listed in Annexure II of the Siting Rules. These include wetlands such as the Dal and Chilka lakes, notified national parks, sanctuaries as well as core zones of biosphere reserves.
Setting up of new units and expansion of existing industries listed under Annexure I, will only be permitted in a 7-25 km belt from the periphery of notified wetlands, parks, sanctuaries and biosphere reserves. However, permission to do so will only be granted if following an assessment, it is found that the activities will not impair the environmental interest of the area.
Source: Sagar, S.P. 1998. 'New green norms on plant location' Business Standard, New Delhi, 03/09/98.
Contact:        K. Roy Paul, Addl. Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Paryavaran Bhavan, CGO Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110 003. Tel: 011-436 1308.

WWF Tiger Conservation Programme
The World Wide Fund for Nature has expressed interest in implementing its new tiger conservation programme in the Eturnagaram, Kinnerasani, and Pakhal Sanctuaries in Khammam, Warangal and West Godavari districts of Andhra Pradesh, and in the Biligiri Ranganaswamy Temple (BRT) Sanctuary in Karnataka. The WWF Tiger Conservation programme has identified the Andhra areas as they already have an ongoing cattle compensation scheme in these PAs. According to Dr. M.K. Ranjitsinh, Director and Regional Coordinator WWF (Tiger Conservation), Andhra Pradesh is the only state in the country promptly paying compensation to owners whose cattle are killed by tigers.
BRT Sanctuary has been included partly because it is surrounded by the forests of Talamalai and Madumalai, thereby enhancing the scope for establishing a tiger corridor. Herbivore population in the area as well as availability of water is not a problem and the project has decided to bestow an initial grant of Rs. 14 lakhs to the area for infrastructure development.
Sources:        Venkat Nagesh on email dated 19/11/98 on nathistory-india@lists.princeton.edu.
'WWF wants tigers to roar in Khammam' Deccan Chronicle quoted on email from Nalim M. dated 17/11/98 on nathistory-india@lists.princeton.edu.

Obituary

The former Chief Justice of the Gujarat and Kerala High Courts, Justice P.S. Poti, died recently of a heart attack in Delhi. He had a distinguished career as a judge and subsequently as an advocate in the Supreme Court. Apart from some significant judgements, which favoured the rights of poor people fighting for justice, Justice Poti played a major role in the attempts at the resolution of the dispute between the local residents/migrant human populations and the Park authorities in the Rajaji National Park. At the behest of the Indian People's Tribunal on Human and Environmental Rights he spoke to a wide range of affected people and officials and produced a report that attempted to balance the twin needs of wildlife conservation and people's livelihood security in the Park and surrounds. The report is considered a milestone in Rajaji's checkered history and has also become some kind of a model to follow for other similar investigations related to protected areas in the country.

Revision of National Wildlife Action Plan
The Union Ministry of Environment and Forests has set up an expert committee to revise the 1983 National Wildlife Action Plan (NWAP). The NWAP currently contains sections on establishing and managing a protected area network, rehabilitating endangered species, protecting wildlife in multiple use zones, captive breeding, wildlife education, research and monitoring, and collaboration with voluntary organisations.
The committee, under the chairmanship of Shri B.G. Deshmukh, is supposed to produce a draft revised version by early 1999. However, this leaves it little time to carry out any larger consultative process, or indeed go into a detailed assessment of the implementation, over the last 15 years, of the existing NWAP. Readers may want to send suggestions to the Committee, c/o the address below.
Contact:        Suresh Chugh, Asst. IGF (WL), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110 003. Tel: 011-436 4593.

Rationalisation of protected area boundaries
Another committee has been set up by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests, to suggest the rationalisation of boundaries of national parks and sanctuaries across India. For several years, ecologists and social activists have pointed out that in very many cases, the boundaries of protected areas have been created more on arbitrary, administrative, or other considerations, rather than ecological ones. In addition, considerable amount of conflict has been created with local communities because in several PAs, areas with little ecological value and tremendous human dependence have been included in the PA, while others with little dependence and high wildlife value has been left out.
The committee is supposed to look at these issues. However, its time frame, three months, leaves one wondering how serious a job it can do. Boundary issues are extremely complicated, and any hasty process can create further problems.
Contact:        S.C. Sharma, Addl. IGF (WL), (as above, under Two new PA categories)

National Workshop on Ecodocumentation
With the objective of synthesising and sharing the widespread efforts at ecodevelopment being carried out in India's protected areas, the Wildlife Institute of India organised a 3-day workshop on "Ecodocumentation", 24-26 November, 1998. The workshop brought together critics and supporters of ecodevelopment, in an open and detailed dialogue. About 30 papers were circulated, forming a valuable reference base for further work on this subject.
Draft recommendations include the need to go towards co-management of PAs and of the ecodevelopment process, to ensure ecological sustainability in development programmes, and to safeguard PAs against destructive commercial threats. A full report is under preparation, and the papers may be collated into a publication.
Contact:        B.M.S. Rathore, Wildlife Institute of India, Post Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehra Dun 248 001 Uttar Pradesh. Tel: 0135 640 112 / 5. Fax: 0135-640 117; Email: wii@wii.gov.in.

Field Coordinators Needed

NEPAL

Workshop on World Heritage Convention

WCPA/IUCN. 1998. Regional Action Plan for Protected Areas in South Asia. World Commission on Protected Areas, South Asia, New Delhi.
Formulated after an extensive review process initiated in 1994, this document presents a framework action plan for protected area planning and management in the seven South Asian countries: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.
Contact:        Kishore Rao, Regional Vice-Chair, South Asia, World Commission on Protected Areas, Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110 003. Tel: 91-11-436 0957; Fax: 91-11-436 3918; Email: krao@envfor.delhi.nic.in.
Proceedings of the Workshop on Biodiversity conservation in Maharashtra: Vision Beyond 2000, Nagpur, September 3-5, 1998. Maharashtra State Forest Department.
A compilation of the proceedings and the recommendations of the workshop entitled Biodiversity Conservation in Maharashtra: Vision Beyond 2000, which largely focused on protected areas (see report in JPAM Update 18). The overall message from the recommendations is somewhat ambiguous, but there are important elements of a more participatory approach to PA management than is currently the case.
Contact:        Chief Wildlife Warden, Govt. of Maharashtra, Jaika Building, Civil Lines Nagpur 440 001, Maharashtra.
Ganeshaiah, K.N. and Uma Shaanker, R. (eds.). 1998. Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple Wildlife Sanctuary: Natural History, Biodiversity and Conservation.  Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, and Vivekananda Girijana Kalyana Kendra (VGKK), Chamrajnagar.
This is an attractively brought out compilation of papers on various aspects of the Biligiri Rangaswamy Temple (BRT) Sanctuary: geology, floral and faunal diversity, history, overview of traditional health practices, farming and socio-economic factors influencing the Soliga tribal-forest relationship, and initiatives of community based conservation. BRT's status as one of India's most researched PAs is well reflected here.
Contact: ATREE, 11, 4^th Main, 1^st Stage, M.S.H. Layout, Anandnagar, Bangalore 560 024, Karnataka. Tel: 91-80-353 0069; Fax: 91-80-353 0070; Email: ganesh@atree.frlht.ernet.in.
VGKK, BR Hills, Chamrajnagar 571 441, Karnataka. Tel: 91-8226-84 025.
The Wilderness News Letter, Quarterly Newsletter published and edited by the Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), Nagpur, Maharashtra.
This publication covers news items and small features in Marathi and English on various issues of wildlife and forests. The editors have invited readers to send in articles for publishing
Contact:        Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) Nagpur, Vali Manzil, Mohan Nagar, Kamptee Road, Nagpur 440 001, Maharashtra. Tel: 0712-528 953; Fax: 0712-552 518.
Ghate, Rucha. Andhari Tiger Sanctuary (Maharashtra): A Case for People's Participation in the Management of Protected Areas. Indian Forester, 124(10), October 1998.
Rucha Ghate, a researcher from the Nagpur University and associated with the NGO Shodh, has made a strong plea for involving local communities in and around the Andhari Sanctuary (part of the Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve) in its management.
Contact:        Rucha Ghate, Department of Economics, Nagpur University, 50 Puranik Layout, Bharat Nagar, Nagpur 440 001, Maharashtra.

CORRESPONDENCE

Melghat Tiger Reserve, Maharashtra

JPAM Update is produced by Kalpavriksh every two months as a follow-up to the workshop on Exploring the Possibilities of Joint Protected Area Management (JPAM), organised at the Indian Institute of Public Administration , New Delhi, in September 1994. JPAM Update 19 was prepared by Pankaj Sekhsaria, Ashish Kothari, Farhad Vania and Roshni Kutty. Several news items above were accessed from Centre for Science and Environment's Green File, but have been credited to their original sources.
This issue is partially funded by the World Wide Fund for Nature - India.
Ideas, comments, news and information may please be sent to the address below:

KALPAVRIKSH
Apartment 5, Shri Dutta Krupa, 908 Deccan Gymkhana, Pune 411 004, Maharashtra, India
Tel/Fax: 91-20-354 239  Email: ashish@nda.vsnl.net.in

URL: http://www-int.stsci.edu/~yogesh/wildlife/jpam19.shtml

Last modified on: Tue Apr 5 15:39:37 2005