Latest news with #WLPA
NDTV
a day ago
- Politics
- NDTV
Kerala Seeks To Amend Wildlife Act To Allow Killing Of Animals. Reasons Explained
Kerala, a state known for its lush forests and biodiversity, has been grappling with a surge in human-wildlife conflicts. These conflicts have led to the loss of human lives, injuries, crop destruction, and economic hardship for farmers. To address this crisis, the Kerala government has been pushing for amendments to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (WLPA), seeking legal provisions to allow the controlled killing or culling of certain wild animals that pose threats to human life and livelihoods. The Forest and Wildlife Department has been tasked with initiating the process to seek central government approval for culling wild animals, such as wild boars, that pose a threat to public safety and livelihoods. The Forest Secretary has been directed to draft a legislative proposal in consultation with the Law Secretary to facilitate the necessary legal provisions, as per a report by Matrubhumi. Here's why Kerala is advocating for these changes: Kerala's unique geography, with nearly 30% of its land covered by forests, places human settlements near wildlife habitats. Rapid urbanisation, habitat degradation, changes in agricultural practices, and regional fluctuations in wildlife populations have also intensified human-wildlife conflicts. From 2016-17 to January 2025, wildlife attacks in Kerala resulted in 919 deaths and 8,967 injuries, according to government data. The state has identified 273 out of 941 village local bodies as human-wildlife conflict hotspots. Human-wildlife conflict: Frequent encounters between humans and wild animals, such as elephants, tigers, wild boars, macaques, peafowl and bison, have resulted in loss of human life and property damage. Crop damage: Wild animals, like elephants and wild boars, cause significant damage to crops, affecting farmers' livelihoods. Public safety concerns: The presence of certain wild animals like monkeys and porcupines in human-dominated areas poses a risk to public safety. What Does the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Currently Allow? The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, is India's cornerstone legislation for protecting wildlife, prohibiting hunting and ensuring conservation of species and their habitats. It also includes provisions for dealing with animals that pose threats. Despite these provisions, the process is slow and bureaucratic. Only the CWLW, a senior state-level official, can authorise killing, leading to delays in addressing urgent threats. Non-lethal measures (capture, tranquilization, relocation) are prioritised, but these are often impractical due to logistical challenges or lack of suitable relocation sites. Court orders and guidelines from bodies like the National Tiger Conservation Authority and the Project Elephant Scheme further restrict lethal action. Why Kerala Finds the Current Law Inadequate? Kerala argues that the Wildlife (Protection) Act's stringent regulations and centralised decision-making hinder timely responses to human-wildlife conflicts. The exclusive authority of the Chief Wildlife Warden (CWLW) also creates bottlenecks. For instance, in remote areas like Wayanad, waiting for CWLW approval can delay action, endangering lives. In 2022, Kerala empowered local bodies to use licensed shooters to kill wild boars raiding crops. However, this measure failed due to a shortage of licensed shooters in rural areas and impractical guidelines, such as checking if a boar is pregnant before shooting. "Before shooting a wild boar, one has to examine whether it is pregnant or not. Such impractical guidelines have failed to serve the purpose. The growing population of wildlife has to be controlled to prevent threats to human lives," State Forest Minister A K Saseendran said. Here are other reasons: Declaring wild boars as vermin (under Section 62) was previously rejected by the central government, limiting the state's ability to control their population. Bonnet macaques, added to Schedule I in 2022, can no longer be captured or relocated without CWLW approval, despite their crop-raiding behaviour. Animals like elephants and tigers, protected under Schedule I, require exhaustive non-lethal measures before lethal action, even when they pose immediate threats. Crop losses (e.g., wild boars destroying up to 60% of yields in Wayanad) threaten food security and farmers' livelihoods. Fear of attacks has disrupted rural life, with 273 villages living under constant threat Proposed Amendments to the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1. Decentralising Authority: The proposal is to transfer the power to issue "kill permits" under Section 11(1)(A) and 11(1)(B) from the CWLW to Chief Conservators of Forests (CCFs). Notably, CCFs are senior officials stationed at regional levels, enabling faster, localised decision-making. This would streamline responses to wildlife threats, especially in conflict hotspots. 2. Declaring Wild Boars as Vermin: The government has proposed to declare wild boars as vermin under Section 62 for specific periods and regions, allowing controlled culling without legal repercussions. Wild boars are prolific breeders and cause widespread agricultural damage. Declaring them vermin would enable farmers and local bodies to manage their populations effectively. 3. Removing Bonnet Macaques from Schedule I: To allow capture and relocation without stringent approvals. 4. Legal Safeguards for Farmers and Officials: Protect farmers and field officers from prosecution when acting against wildlife threats, encouraging proactive measures. 5. Region-Specific Culling: Allow controlled culling of "man-eating" animals (e.g., tigers, leopards) in high-conflict zones, with clear guidelines to prevent misuse. Ethical Concerns Kerala's proposal to amend the Wildlife Protection Act to allow the culling of wild animals has sparked debates. Conservationists raise ethical concerns, citing potential harm to endangered species and ecosystems. Ecological experts warn of unintended population imbalances and emphasise addressing habitat degradation.
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- General
- Hindustan Times
No wildlife rescue centre in Gurugram even a year after RTI flags crisis
More than a year after an urgent Right to Information (RTI) request exposed the absence of an approved wildlife treatment and rescue centre in Gurugram, the situation remains unchanged, sparking concern among conservationists and legal activists. The continuing lack of infrastructure is being seen as a serious threat to the district's wild species, including those protected under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act (WLPA). Filed under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act—which deals with matters of 'life and liberty'—the plea had sought details on available wildlife rescue facilities and accountability for previous wildlife deaths caused by inadequate care. In its January 9, 2024, response, the divisional wildlife officer, Gurugram, admitted, 'Presently no approved treatment/rescue centre is working under this division.' However, no steps have been taken since then to create one. 'There is still no new facility, veterinary staff, or even a designated location,' said Vaishali Rana, wildlife volunteer and trustee of the Aravallis Bachao Citizens Movement. 'One year after this RTI laid bare the state's failure, absolutely nothing has changed on the ground.' The RTI also highlighted the absence of trained veterinary specialists and emergency protocols for treating injured or ill wild animals—particularly Schedule I species such as langurs, Indian peafowl, and monitor lizards. Though the department claimed 'proper treatment' is provided when complaints arise, activists say this vague assurance fails to address the core problem. 'Gurugram needs a fully equipped, government-recognised wildlife rescue and rehabilitation centre with round-the-clock care,' Rana added. Forest department officials, requesting anonymity said that current rescue efforts rely on ad-hoc arrangements, with injured wildlife often transported by guards or volunteers to clinics unfit for wild species. The RTI response was forwarded to senior authorities in Panchkula, including the Chief Wildlife Warden, but no follow-up directives have been made public. Advocate Chander Saharan, who filed the RTI, called the inaction 'deeply disappointing' and warned it could expose the state to liability under wildlife protection and cruelty laws. Conservationists are now preparing to approach the state human rights Commission and the National Green Tribunal.
