MK Ranjitsinh Jhala: ‘I'm curious to see all animals with my own eyes'

Hindustan Times

2 days ago

Before writing nature and wildlife-focused books, you played a key role in the drafting of the Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972. How did this opportunity come to you? Wildlife author MK Ranjitsinh Jhala.
In 1971, I was brought to the Ministry of Food and Agriculture from Madhya Pradesh. Wildlife protection was of relatively little importance to the Indian government, so this ministry also looked after forests. My [IAS] batchmate, who was also a deputy secretary, knew of my interest in wildlife. He invited me to show Mrs Gandhi my movies on wildlife, which I had made as a collector of the Mandla district, which had the Kanha National Park. That was in 1970.
In 1969, a conference was organised by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which was inaugurated by Mrs Gandhi, so she knew something about conservation and was interested in wildlife. As I recollect, on 20 September 1971, Mrs Gandhi called a meeting in her office, inviting people dealing with wildlife. There was Dr Karan Singh, who was then the Chairman of the Indian Board of Wildlife, [Kunwar] 'Billy' Arjan Singh (of Dudhwa National Park fame), Anne Wright, and Kailash Sankhala (who was then occupied with a grant under the Nehru Fellowship). I was the youngest and the juniormost chap there.
When Mrs Gandhi asked what could be done for wildlife, Dr. Singh said it was a state subject, but Arjan Singh really went for it. He asked, 'What priority, Madam Prime Minister, does wildlife have in your scheme of things?' To which she replied, 'I love wildlife, but it can't take precedence over human beings.' It was the politician in her speaking. But evidently, she got a little annoyed. Then, after being nudged by Moni Malhotra, I spoke about Articles 248 and 250 of the Constitution and told Mrs Gandhi that we need a wildlife legislation. And that the state governments are starved for funds. We need to provide capital expenditure and non-recurring expenditure for the conservation of wildlife, particularly national parks and sanctuaries. And the maintenance, recurring costs will be borne by the state government. She thought it was a good idea and the meeting was dispersed. Two days later, a note came to my minister, which said Ranjitsinh should be put in charge of wildlife in India, so that's how it started, how I went over and drafted the act. And would you believe it? The act was drafted in six months and passed in the first session because of Mrs Gandhi's patronage. Eighteen states, including one non-Congress-ruled, passed resolutions in their respective state assemblies empowering the Government of India to legislate on a state subject under the Constitution before I had finished drafting it because Mrs Gandhi had written letters to all the chief ministers requesting the same. Until about 2002, I was involved in its amendments, too. But it seems that the priorities of the successive governments have changed, and I regret to say this but the Wildlife (Protection) Act is regarded as a stumbling block towards development, which isn't development at all.
You've dedicated your latest book Mountain Mammals of the World to your grandchildren, noting that they should go to the mountains instead of looking at the mountains on their computer screens. In your view, what are the reasons for this diminishing interest in the present generation to explore nature?
The interest hasn't decreased. The emphasis has changed, which is on safari parks and zoos. The precedence of ex-situ conservation over in-situ (natural) conservation, in my opinion, is wrong.
The other thing is that there's a sharp focus on select mega mammals, which are the be-all and end-all of wildlife visits. People don't go to see a park or build a communion with nature. They go to see a tiger, a lion, or an elephant, or a rhinoceros in Kaziranga, etc. They don't go to savour nature. They ogle at animals. And the poor animals are just bored to death. That's not wildlife viewing; it's very myopic as you are denying yourself the pleasure of seeing hundreds and thousands of other animals. And that's a failure on the part of a lot of us, starting from myself, the media, and everybody else, because we've collectively not popularised the wealth of animals.
You also note that mountains, Buddhism, and Kashmir were the three elements that inspired you to work on this book.
During my MA, I studied ancient history, and I was fascinated by Buddhism. I'm a Buddhist at heart. I stood first in the university paper on Buddhism, which is what I told the Dalai Lama, who has written an Introduction to the book. Buddhism is a way of life, not a religion. There's a separate code of conduct for the Upāsaka/ Upāsikā, a lay follower, for example.
I've covered 119 taxa, species and subspecies of the mountain mammals of the world. Out of these, approximately 80 taxa are found in Asia, and almost half of them are in the Buddhist-dominated mountains of Asia. Some are surviving only because of the Buddhist monasteries. Had it not been for them, these species would've been long gone. I've personally witnessed this. From the rooftop of Rizong Gompa (a Buddhist monastery in Ladakh), I saw wolves chasing a herd of shapu (urial). The males ran up the mountain, and the females and younger ones ran towards the monastery to seek sanctuary there. That's Buddhism.
Then, today, the largest number of mountain mammals anywhere is in Kashmir state. Or shall I say, in the undivided Kashmir, which was handed over by Dr. Singh's father Hari Singhji to the Union of India. The state had about 30 species and subspecies out of 119. There's no other place like that in the world, especially for mountain mammals. My first exposure to mountain mammals was in Ladakh in 1958 when I was still a college student and subsequently in 1960, when I saw and photographed hangul (the Kashmir stag), the Tibetan Argali, the blue sheep and the rest. I saw my first snow leopard there. I've been all over the world but I haven't seen them anywhere except Kashmir. This is the wealth of Kashmir. Compare this to Africa, which has only four species of mountain mammals. The whole of South America — only two. The highest mountain range outside Asia, the Andes, runs from one end of the top of the continent right to the bottom, running 8,900 km, only two! In one nala of Ladakh, Phobrang in the Chang Chenmo area, in one day of walking for 14 hours and riding a horse, I saw six, which is equivalent to the number of them found in the two continents of the world.
From the array of species and subspecies you've explored and documented, what is that one story related to any of them you find the most interesting?
Perhaps when I first saw a snow leopard. After so many years of trudging and travelling, suddenly on a cold winter morning, I saw it. And I watched it for more than an hour. And so was seeing Markhor for the first time in Kazinag, with the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) above and [to my left], silhouetted against the sky and the backdrop of snow, was this huge male with corkscrew horns towering above him. Horns higher than his shoulder height, standing statuesque with wind rippling his wavy long beard. The sighting of the Caspian stag (maral) was also wonderful.
But there is an incident in the book about my encounter with the mountain gorillas, which is rather saucy. There were 25 of us [on the expedition]. But this old female gorilla sort of scrutinised 25 of us, all wild-lifers and picked me. I do believe that animals have a sense of perception and they can make out people who they like and whom they don't. They get vibes of some sort. And I've got that kind of response from both wild and domestic animals. That has been my experience. The fact that that female came to me just to touch me and go back was a bit of a defining moment.
In the last few years, you've made special efforts to see animals you failed to observe in your youth. Which are the ones you want to see now?
I'm curious about seeing all animals with my own eyes. And, if possible, photograph them. That has taken me all over the world. But that aside, seeing species other than the ones you've already seen is always interesting. So, I travel, go to local places, and just savour the ambience. For the last few years, I've maintained a list of 10 animals and I keep on seeing some of them, not so many now. Then, I also strike out some and others go into that list.
But there are several animals I've never seen. For example, the Amur leopard. I've seen it in captivity though. They're gorgeous. Then, the Amur (Siberian) tiger — the largest cat in the world. They're much larger than ours. All tigers came from the north. So, I want to go and see one. I went to Lazovsky (Nature Reserve), near Vladivostok, with my daughter Radhika. The Director of the Reserve said, sure, sir, you come and stay here. I asked him what are the chances of sighting the tiger, to which he replied that, sir, if you stay here for a month and go out in the winter, which is minus 30 degrees Celsius, you may see one. I didn't have a month to spend there, so that was that. Then, I tried to see the mountain tapir but failed to see one in the Andes. I have seen the Dall sheep but not the others, for example, Stone's sheep, a variety, in Yukon. I haven't seen the snow sheep. But, as luck would have it, I've seen almost all of them. There are a few left, and I'd like to see them if I can and if age allows me to.
As people often encroach upon animals' space, I was wondering about your views on photographing animals in the wild.
People not only intrude upon animals' privacy, but also upon their movements. Just to get better pictures, they block the movement of animals. There's also, unfortunately, baiting to get animals, which is illegal, but is still practised. Then, there is this practice of muscling out the other man and going ahead of him in the jeep or whatever you can to get a better photograph of a particular animal. The interest of the animal is completely compromised. I abhor that. I hope I've not done that myself.
Anyway, if you're going to photograph animals, they don't want you there, but you're there, so the least you can do is not bother them. Firstly, if you disturb them, then it'll not be in your interest. Secondly, it's just not right. I also feel that some animals have become so immune to disturbances that they don't really mind at all, but one must mind their manners.
I read that you want 'the moronic belief in the medicinal efficacy of rhino horn' to end someday. Could you share your views on exploiting wildlife principally for commercial purposes?
One is the therapeutic or propounded quality of some of the products, like the rhino horn, a classic example, which is just keratin. It's the same material as your fingernail. Many of the horns or the other items, which are used for improving sexual potency or rectification of some venereal diseases and whatever — there is no scientific proof for that. But the belief is such, especially regarding Chinese and Tibetan medicine. However, I must say that their popularity is decreasing. And if the governments do not sponsor it, if they discourage it, it will die out very soon. There are a few others where their efficacy cannot be doubted. And I am talking particularly about musk. It has been used by man for at least 5,000 years. In Paris, I met this big shot from the Chanel organisation. And he said there is no substitute or a commodity in the whole world like musk. It's used as a base for perfumery. I've smelt a pod of a musk deer, shot almost 70 years ago, which still smells aromatic. The problem is that apart from its base in perfumery, its efficacy, even in some aromatic things, is genuine. How do you stop this business as usual? The Chinese have musk deer farms. And you can siphon off musk from the navel gland of the male musk deer. The females don't have them. But as long as there is a supply from these farms, the demand for musk will remain and as long as there is a demand, the illegal supply from animals killed in the wild will continue. The Nepalese and others have huge nets and they drive animals — they don't bother to make out whether it's a male or a female. If it's a male, they'll get the musk. If it's female, they'll get its meat (it's delicious). So they will still be [hunted] to eat the meat. The musk deer will always be pursued, until and unless people stop using musk at all, for whatever it's worth.
Saurabh Sharma is a Delhi-based writer and freelance journalist. They can be found on Instagram/X: @writerly_life.