In anticipation of the arrival of African cheetahs from Namibia, there has been plenty of media attention on the trans-continental transport and introduction of these large cats. Much of this coverage has not been based on an in-depth and comprehensive analysis of various aspects of this project. I attempt such an analysis.
The Action Plan, which is the basis for implementing this project, has weak scientific foundations. It is well established that even in the best of habitats (for example, the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem straddling Kenya and Tanzania), cheetahs exist in very low densities of around 1 per 100 sq km. Average female home ranges have been estimated to be about 750 sq km. The cheetahs are expected to establish themselves as a population in Kuno after about 15 years. This is the predicted best-case scenario based on the release of at least 50 cheetahs in the next five to 10 years from Africa. The established population is expected to number 21 animals. This is an unrealistic expectation as the area is limited to Kuno National Park, which is only 748 sq km in extent. You can do the maths — the area (748 sq km) can at best accommodate only about 10 adult cheetahs. Don’t forget, this is the most suitable site that has been identified. How will a self-sustaining, wild and free-ranging population of cheetahs be able to establish itself in India when there is no suitable habitat of sufficient size for them to do so? More recent comments by those involved with the effort have placed a much higher number of cheetahs having to be introduced from Africa to establish a population in India — estimated as high as 500 to 1,000 cheetahs — which is very worrying. Unlike other large cats, free-ranging cheetahs are characterised by disproportionately large home ranges and very low population densities.
One of the biological objectives of this project is to “re-establish the ecosystem function role of the cheetah in representative areas of its former range”. For cheetahs to be able to play this role, they need to exist in sufficient numbers and be present and operate over extensive areas. I find it very difficult to believe that at the predicted low numbers (21 cheetahs in 15 years) and as a result functioning at an extremely limited scale, the introduced cheetahs will be able to effectively play the expected role of a top predator to impact ecosystem function.
This project makes unrealistic claims about its conservation value, for cheetahs, grasslands and other open forest ecosystems in India and also for other endangered species like the Great Indian Bustard. On the contrary, the project will be a major distraction and divert much-needed attention and resources from priority conservation initiatives that are part of India’s National Wildlife Action Plan (2017-2031), which, by the way, does not even mention the introduction of African cheetahs. The National Wildlife Action Plan does place priority on the Great Indian Bustard, caracal and Asiatic lion, to name a few. If the Government of India is really serious about the conservation of grasslands and open forest ecosystems, it should delete these habitats as a category from the Wasteland Atlas of India. This would be a simpler, quicker, and more efficient way to provide enhanced protection to these habitats. It doesn’t require African cheetahs to protect these habitats. Even if a charismatic species is required to act as a flagship for these habitats, in Asiatic lions, wolves, caracal, blackbuck, Great Indian Bustard among many more native species which are present in these habitats, we are spoilt for choice. Moreover, let us not forget that the African cheetahs are being introduced only at one site, Kuno National Park. How will 21 cheetahs present at a single site, that too after 15 years, be able to conserve grasslands across India?
To top it all, it is challenging the rule of law. I definitely view this as an attempt to stall and further delay the translocation of lions as ordered by the Supreme Court in 2013. The NTCA filed a review petition and sought a clarification from the Court that its 2013 Order did not impose a blanket ban on the introduction of African cheetahs in India. The Court, in an interim order dated April 10, 2018, stated: “It may be mentioned that earlier the intention was to import the African Cheetahs into Kuno, Shivpuri (Madhya Pradesh). By way of this application, the reintroduction of the Cheetahs from Africa is sought to be made in some other places as mentioned in para 3 of the application.” It is important to note that the Court has clearly mentioned that the NTCA is seeking to introduce African cheetahs in sites other than Kuno. I quote from para 3 of NTCA’s application which the 2018 Order mentions, “Pursuant to the above order, efforts have been made to investigate alternate sites for the reintroduction of cheetahs into India, such as Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh as well as Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve, Tamil Nadu.” And look at where we have landed up!
It is disappointing that national and international scientists and conservation institutions have chosen to ignore the science, not be open to consultation and be driven by their own desires and needs. This approach will have major negative implications for conservation as an inclusive and participatory enterprise in India.
To conclude, there is no recorded instance of introduction of cheetahs succeeding in unfenced areas, which is what is being planned in India. The scientific foundation of the Action Plan to introduce African cheetahs in India is flawed. It also disregards our national conservation priorities and the rule of law as well as making exaggerated and unfeasible conservation claims. It will distract much-needed attention and resources from priority conservation issues and unfortunately end up as a very costly mistake.
The writer is CEO, Metastring Foundation & Coordinator, Biodiversity Collaborative
This article first appeared in the print edition on September 19, 2022, under the title, ‘A Big Cat Mistake’
