A relatively unusual human-animal conflict is playing out in the vicinity of one of India’s premier tiger reserves, and much of the blame should be laid at the doors of the wildlife authorities in charge of the protected area. In the past two-and-a-half months, tigers have killed three people, one of them a forest officer, on the outskirts of Ranthambore National Park in Rajasthan. As reports in this paper have underlined, in at least two cases, the animals’ natural tendencies went awry because the park authorities provided live bait to their ailing mother. They lost the inhibition tigers usually have towards humans and became a risk for the forest staff and visitors to Ranthambore.
Offering live bait to injured or old tigers is not banned, but the National Tiger Conservation Authority’s standard operating procedure deems it “not advisable”. The manual says tigers “need to be managed with minimum human intervention”. Artificially feeding wild tigers to ensure their longevity “goes against the basic tenets” of conservation, it underlines. Live baiting predatory animals is known to impair their natural survival skills. It’s natural for old and infirm animals to die of starvation or in a fight with their adversaries. This fundamental precept of nature seems to be lost on wildlife managers in several parts of the country. The problem is not just limited to providing food to infirm animals. It’s not uncommon today for wildlife authorities to nurse animals injured in territorial fights or medically care for tigers past their prime. This goes against nature’s way of managing tiger demographics. The animal no doubt evokes awe and at times, it’s difficult to barricade emotions from conservation. But there’s a fine line between respecting the fundamentals of conservation and misplaced kindness for an individual member of a majestic species. Artificial interventions, such as those in Ranthambore, boost tiger numbers in pockets, worsen conflicts among them and eventually push some of the animals to stray close to human habitats.
The understaffed and ill-equipped forest departments in most parts of the country deserve compliments for bringing the tiger back from the brink after the 2005 crisis. But conservation should not be just about numbers. The Ranthambore crisis betrays an attitude of overcautiousness among park managers. Authorities, instead, need to initiate conversations on the carrying capacity of the country’s national parks and settle on a viable population of the tiger — especially because a sizeable percentage of tigers live outside protected areas today. The focus should be on creating and maintaining healthy ecosystems where the tiger can thrive without endangering the lives of humans.
