Village Relocation in India’s Tiger Reserves

The recent directive from the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) has reignited discussions on the relocation of villages within India’s tiger reserves. This initiative aims to compile comprehensive data on the families and villages residing inside these protected areas. The urgency stems from various complaints regarding alleged evictions from reserves such as Tadoba, Durgavati, and Buxa.

Historical Context of Relocations

Relocating villages from forests is not a new concept in India. The British colonial government initiated relocations primarily for timber production. Post-independence, the focus shifted towards wildlife conservation, especially for tigers. The launch of Project Tiger in 1973 marked milestone. It aimed to establish protected areas like Kanha, Jim Corbett, and Bandipur, necessitating the relocation of human settlements.

Rationale Behind Relocation

Tigers require expansive territories for breeding and survival. The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) marks that a minimum of 800 to 1,200 square kilometres is necessary to sustain a viable population of breeding tigresses. To achieve this, human-free zones, termed ‘inviolate spaces,’ are essential. These core areas are crucial for maintaining ecological balance and supporting tiger populations.

Legislative Framework Governing Relocations

The Forest Rights Act (FRA) of 2006 and the amended Wildlife Protection Act (WPA) provide the legal framework for village relocations. The WPA enables the creation of inviolate spaces, while the FRA allows communities to claim land rights and harvest forest produce. Relocations must be voluntary and based on mutual agreements, ensuring that community rights are respected.

Implementation Challenges

Despite the legal provisions, the relocation process faces challenges. Conflicts often arise between forest departments and local communities over the implementation of laws. Allegations of coercion and inadequate support for those choosing to relocate have surfaced. Many communities report that their rights claims are pending and access to their lands is obstructed, leading to dissatisfaction and unrest.

Current Status of Villages in Tiger Reserves

As of June 2024, there are 57 notified tiger reserves in India. The NTCA reported that 848 villages and 89,808 families reside in core areas of these reserves. Among these, 257 villages have been successfully relocated, leaving 591 villages and 64,801 families still within core areas. The Tiger Task Force, established in 2005, previously identified 273 villages in 28 tiger reserves, denoting the scale of the issue.

Future Directions

The NTCA’s recent communication to state governments emphasises the need for action plans regarding village relocations. It seeks to address ongoing issues and ensure that the rights of affected communities are upheld. A comprehensive understanding of the needs and rights of these communities is crucial for successful conservation efforts.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Critically analyse the impact of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 on the relocation of villages in India’s tiger reserves.
2. What are the ecological implications of maintaining inviolate spaces in tiger conservation? Discuss with examples.
3. Estimate the number of villages that have been relocated under Project Tiger since its inception in 1973.
4. Point out the key challenges faced by the National Tiger Conservation Authority in implementing relocation policies for villages in core tiger habitats.

Answer Hints:

1. Critically analyse the impact of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 on the relocation of villages in India’s tiger reserves.

1. The Forest Rights Act (FRA) recognizes the rights of forest-dwelling communities, ensuring they can claim land titles and access forest resources.
2. It mandates that relocations must be voluntary and based on mutually agreed terms, protecting community rights during the process.
3. The FRA has led to increased awareness and legal backing for communities, empowering them to negotiate better relocation terms.
4. Conflicts arise when forest departments do not fully adhere to FRA provisions, leading to allegations of coercion and inadequate support.
5. Overall, while the FRA aims to protect rights, its implementation often faces challenges, affecting the relocation process and community trust.

2. What are the ecological implications of maintaining inviolate spaces in tiger conservation? Discuss with examples.

1. Inviolate spaces are essential for tigers as they provide undisturbed habitats necessary for breeding and hunting.
2. These areas help maintain genetic diversity within tiger populations, which is crucial for their long-term survival.
3. Examples include Kanha and Bandipur, where such spaces have led to successful tiger population recoveries.
4. They also support broader biodiversity, allowing other species to thrive without human interference.
5. However, the creation of these spaces can lead to human-wildlife conflicts if local communities are not adequately compensated or supported.

3. Estimate the number of villages that have been relocated under Project Tiger since its inception in 1973.

1. As of the latest reports, about 80 villages had been relocated by 2005 under Project Tiger.
2. Since then, an additional 177 villages have been relocated, bringing the total to approximately 257 villages.
3. The Tiger Task Force identified 273 villages in 28 reserves needing relocation, indicating ongoing efforts.
4. Relocations are uneven, with some reserves seeing more success than others, influenced by local conditions and community cooperation.
5. Overall, the number marks the complexity and challenges of effectively implementing relocation policies in tiger habitats.

4. Point out the key challenges faced by the National Tiger Conservation Authority in implementing relocation policies for villages in core tiger habitats.

1. Conflicts often arise between forest departments and local communities, leading to mistrust and allegations of coercion.
2. Implementation of the Forest Rights Act is inconsistent, affecting the voluntary nature of relocations.
3. Many communities report inadequate compensation and poor relocation processes, leading to dissatisfaction and unrest.
4. There is a lack of comprehensive data on village demographics and needs, complicating effective planning and support.
5. Political and administrative hurdles can delay decision-making and action plans, impacting timely relocations and conservation goals.