Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Type: Species

  • GPS study aims to reduce human-animal conflicts in Assam

    GPS study aims to reduce human-animal conflicts in Assam

    Why in the News

    Assam has moved from a major knowledge gap on where its wild elephants go to a five-year satellite-tracked map of how they move through forests, tea plantations, farmland and riverine habitats. The Assam Forest Department and World Wide Fund for Nature-India (WWF-India) released the study during the 72nd Wildlife Week to guide habitat protection and reduce human-elephant conflict.

    What did the tracking study do?

    1. GPS satellite tracking: Collars fitted on wild elephants record their position through the Global Positioning System (GPS), much like a phone sharing its live location. Researchers then map where and when the animals move.
    2. Who was tracked: Four female-led herds and a solitary male were followed in Udalguri, Sonitpur and Biswanath, three high-conflict districts on the northern bank of the Brahmaputra.
    3. Scale of data: Over five years, tracking generated more than 38,000 GPS locations across multi-use landscapes, areas shared by forests, farms and plantations.
    4. The report: The findings appear in ‘Tracking the Giants: Movement and Habitat-Use Patterns of GPS-Collared Elephants in Assam’.
    5. The takeaway: Assam now has baseline information on where elephant ranging overlaps human land use, the exact zone where conflict arises, so prevention can be targeted there.

    What did the elephants’ movements reveal?

    1. Core habitats: Sonai-Rupai, Behali and Bornadi Wildlife Sanctuaries were used extensively. Protected areas and reserve forests stayed important elephant habitat for much of the year.
    2. Tea plantations as pathways: Elephants used tea plantations as movement pathways and secondary habitats, places to pass through and stay outside forests, which often brought them close to people.
    3. Paddy season expansion: Herds showed a strong seasonal pattern. The home ranges of female-led herds expanded during the paddy cropping season, a period of high human-elephant conflict.

    Why does Assam need this map?

    1. Conflict toll: Human-elephant conflict has killed 1,147 people and 246 elephants in Assam over the past decade, the State’s Forest Minister told the Assembly.
    2. Elephant stronghold: The 2025 Synchronised All India Elephant Census found Assam to be the northeast’s stronghold of Asian elephants, with about 4,149 animals.
    3. Planning uses: The Minister said the study will guide conservation planning, wildlife-friendly infrastructure and safer coexistence between people and wildlife.
    4. What conflict management needs: WWF-India’s elephant programme said preventing conflict requires knowing where elephants move, which habitats and land they use, and how this shifts across seasons.

    Challenges

    1. Small sample: Five tracked groups in three districts cannot capture elephant behaviour across the whole State.
    2. Working landscapes: Tea estates double as elephant pathways and workplaces, so daily contact between people and elephants is built into the landscape.
    3. Crop losses and retaliation: Herds range widest when paddy is in the field, and crop losses push farmers towards illegal electric fencing and poisoning.
    4. Data to action gap: A movement map changes nothing on the ground until it shapes fences, roads and land-use decisions.

    Way Forward

    1. Secure mapped pathways: Protect the sanctuary and tea-garden routes the study mapped, treating them as elephant corridors.
    2. Seasonal early warning: Use tracking data to send alerts to villages near herd routes during the paddy season.
    3. Wildlife-sensitive development: Fold movement data into road, rail and zoning decisions before projects are approved.
    4. Faster compensation: Pay crop and life losses quickly and transparently through direct benefit transfer, so tolerance for elephants does not erode.

    Conclusion

    Assam now knows where its elephants go and when, which lets conflict management move from reacting to raids to planning for them. The test is whether the State turns these maps into protected pathways and seasonal warnings before the next paddy season.

    Back2Basics: Asian elephant

    1. Conservation status: Endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List, and listed in Appendix I of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS).
    2. India’s share: India holds the largest wild Asian elephant population, about 60% of the global total by the 2017 census.
    3. Range States: Karnataka has the highest population, followed by Assam and Kerala.
    4. Project Elephant (1992): The central scheme protects elephant habitats and corridors, to reduce crop damage and accidental deaths.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2026] Which of the following statements with regard to the arrival of Amur Falcons at Doyang Lake in Nagaland each year from Mongolia is/are correct? 1. It showcases how sustained local conservation efforts can contribute to the arrival and protection of international migratory birds. 2. It reflects the global success of advanced tracking technologies that guide migratory birds back to their stopover sites. 3. It confirms that Amur Falcons have adapted to permanent residency in India due to favourable habitat changes. (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 (c) 2 and 3 (d) 3 only ANSWER: A”

  • From the brink to a comeback, hope for India’s wildlife

    From the brink to a comeback, hope for India’s wildlife

    Why in the News

    A Great Indian Bustard chick has hatched in Kutch, Gujarat, after a decade, one of several recoveries showing threatened species can return from the brink of extinction. Highlighted during Wildlife Week (October 2 to 8), these gains last only where States sustain funding, science and community participation over many years.

    What is species recovery, and what framework does India have?

    1. What recovery means: Species recovery brings a population back from near extinction by restoring habitat and prey, breeding animals and returning them to the wild, much like rehabilitating a patient.
    2. Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats (IDWH): This Union scheme backs recovery of 24 identified species, with States doing research, habitat work, protection and community outreach. Eg. great Indian bustard, Sangai, dugong, hangul.
    3. Threat largely unmeasured: 1,012 assessed Indian animal species are threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List, the global extinction-risk register. Assessments cover only 7.2% of documented species.
    4. National Red List Roadmap: India launched it at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi in 2025, aiming for National Red Data Books, registers of species at risk, for plants and animals by 2030.
    5. The takeaway: The IDWH list is only a starting point; a national risk picture must show where recovery goes next.

    How have threatened species recovered in India?

    1. Nilgiri tahr: Tamil Nadu’s Project Nilgiri Tahr surveys, radio-collars and maps the tahr across Tamil Nadu and Keralam with the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) and IUCN. Counts rose from 1,303 to 1,364 in a year.
    2. Vultures: India’s ban on veterinary diclofenac, which had caused catastrophic vulture losses, was the crucial step:
      • the Jatayu Conservation Breeding Centre, Pinjore, run by the Haryana Forest Department and the Bombay Natural History Society, breeds white-rumped, long-billed and slender-billed vultures;
      • Tamil Nadu’s Segur Plateau remains an important habitat, with breeding populations in Mudumalai Tiger Reserve.
    3. Large mammals in protected landscapes: Protection with community support has helped:
      • Asiatic lions in Gujarat now occupy a wider part of Saurashtra;
      • greater one-horned rhinos thrive in Assam’s Pobitora Wildlife Sanctuary, which has exceptionally high rhino density;
      • Meghalaya’s plan for the clouded leopard, its State animal, covers 14 priority landscapes.
    4. Dugong: Tamil Nadu set up India’s first dugong conservation reserve across 448.34 sq km of Palk Bay seagrass, where a WII baseline estimated 270 dugongs.
    5. Snow leopard: India’s first scientific population assessment estimated 718 snow leopards in 2024. In Himachal Pradesh’s Kibber, local women help forest teams set camera traps.

    Why do recoveries abroad show that sustained action and money work?

    1. Iberian lynx: In Spain and Portugal, restoring habitat and prey, captive breeding and release lifted mature lynx from 62 to 648 in about two decades.
    2. Oryx and saiga: The scimitar-horned oryx has returned to the wild in Chad, and the saiga antelope has recovered in Kazakhstan.
    3. Phoenix Species Project: Re:wild and the Bezos Earth Fund have committed $200 million to recover 100 of the world’s most threatened species, showing recovery needs dependable money.

    Challenges

    1. Neglected species: Species that receive little public attention struggle to attract funding.
    2. Plans not reaching the ground: Recovery plans fail unless political commitment shapes land use, infrastructure and livelihood decisions.
    3. Costs borne by communities: Fishermen who release dugongs caught in their nets can lose valuable gear.

    Way Forward

    1. Sustained State budgets: State leaders should prioritise recovery, bring departments together and fund it across successive budgets.
    2. State conservation funds: Pool government, industry, philanthropy and science, as Tamil Nadu’s Endangered Species Conservation Fund does for the mahseer, striped hyena, Madras hedgehog, lion-tailed macaque and hornbill.
    3. Field science and training: Place scientists close to the field, and train staff in surveys, conservation breeding and genetic analysis.
    4. Community partnership: Involve communities in surveys and ground decisions, and compensate losses, as Tamil Nadu does for fishermen’s nets.

    Conclusion

    India has shown that threatened species can return when protection, science and local stewardship last for years. Whether States keep paying once the first gains arrive will decide which species follow.

    Key numbers

    1. India’s share of global biodiversity: 2.4% of world land area; nearly 8% of flora and 7.5% of fauna.
    2. Megadiversity: one of 17 megadiverse countries, with parts of 4 of the world’s 36 biodiversity hotspots.
    3. Endemism: around 28% of India’s plants and over 30% of its animals are found nowhere else.
    4. IUCN Red List coverage: 7,516 Indian animal species assessed.
    5. Vultures, Madhya Pradesh census: 8,397 (2019) to 12,981 (2025).
    6. Asiatic lions, Gujarat: 674 (2020) to 891 (2025).

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2024] Consider the following statements: Statement-I: The Indian Flying Fox is placed under the “vermin” category in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Statement-II: The Indian Flying Fox feeds on the blood of other animals. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (a) Both statement I and Statement II are correct and statement II explains statement I (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I (c) Staement- I is correct , but Statement II is incorrect* (d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct ANSWER:”

  • Bird islands

    Why in the News

    Two male Great Indian Bustards have been released into the wild at the Desert National Park in Jaisalmer, under a conservation plan that now holds 97 birds. It is a rare gain for a species of about 120, but India still protects single species in enclosed pockets rather than whole landscapes.

    What is the Great Indian Bustard programme, and why was it needed?

    1. What the programme does: The Great Indian Bustard (‘Godawan’) is a heavy Rajasthan grassland bird. The plan breeds it in captivity for release, like a nursery raising saplings.
    2. National bird debate: Salim Ali wanted it named the national bird so that protection would follow. The Indian Board for Wildlife chose the peacock.
    3. Why it was needed: The bird numbered about 1,260 in 1969 and has been close to extinction for nearly half a century, pushed down by:
      • hunting, royal hunts included, into the late 1970s;
      • irrigation, turning grasslands once dismissed as ‘wastelands’ into pesticide-soaked fields and roads;
      • power lines, the most recent threat.
    4. The takeaway: Captive breeding can lift numbers, but it does not undo the habitat loss that caused the decline.

    What has the breeding plan achieved?

    1. Captive-bred stock: 57 birds in the plan are captive-bred, and nine more await release.
    2. Breeding output: The captive-bred birds produced 29 chicks this year, up from 24 last year.
    3. Ceremony: The Union and Rajasthan Environment Ministers attended a release marked by “considerable bureaucratic pomp”.

    Why were power-line protections narrowed?

    1. Collision risk: The heavy, poor-sighted bustard flies at the height of high-tension lines, so wires in its path endanger it.
    2. Supreme Court order, 2021: The Supreme Court ordered that low-voltage lines in the bird’s priority habitats be laid underground.
    3. Modified order: Renewable energy companies objected that undergrounding raised the cost of solar power. The Court then limited the order to lines in the bird’s narrower ‘critical’ habitat.

    Why is species-by-species conservation falling short?

    1. Neglected birds: The Godawan now features in government and private marketing, but most get no such attention. Nearly 1,256 bird species, about 11.5% of the world’s total, are threatened.
    2. Common birds in decline: Skylark numbers have fallen nearly 80% in 12 years.
    3. ‘Captive to symbolism’: India’s policy favours showcase moves over habitats:
      • a tigress from Valmiki flown to Buxa;
      • African cheetahs kept in enclosures;
      • Gir’s lions confined to Saurashtra and straying into villages;
      • the Delhi Ridge planted with peepal and banyan unsuited to its dry ecology.
    4. Islands of protection: Policy praises coexistence of people and wildlife on paper. In practice it builds isolated, walled African-style reserves that keep animals apart from people.
    5. Overflow into farms: Animals thriving inside walls spill into villages and fields, as elephants show. So landscapes, not species, should be the unit of conservation.

    Challenges

    1. Partial line protection: Undergrounding only in critical habitat leaves birds exposed wherever they fly beyond it.
    2. Grasslands undervalued: Open grasslands are treated as unproductive land, so they are easily diverted to farms and solar parks.
    3. Small founder pool: A flock bred from few birds risks low genetic diversity and poor survival after release.
    4. Flagship bias: Declines in common birds draw little policy attention compared with flagship species.

    Way Forward

    1. Bird diverters: Power utilities should fit bird diverters (reflective markers that make wires visible) across the bustard’s wider range.
    2. Grassland reserves: Rajasthan should notify key grasslands as conservation reserves under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
    3. Landscape plans: The Union Environment Ministry should plan conservation across protected areas, farmland and corridors, with village participation.
    4. Bird monitoring: Fund regular national surveys of common birds so declines are caught early.

    Conclusion

    India can now breed a near-extinct bird in captivity but has not secured the open landscapes it needs. Whether the bustard’s wider range is shielded from power lines and land conversion will show if conservation moves beyond showcase releases.

    Key numbers

    1. Bustard decline: 600 birds by 2000.
    2. Rajasthan count: 140 to 175 birds by the 2010s.
    3. Indian roller decline: about 30% in 12 years.

    Back2Basics: Great Indian Bustard

    1. Threat status: Listed as Critically Endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List.
    2. Legal cover: Protected under Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and listed in Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
    3. State bird: It is the State bird of Rajasthan.
    4. Range: Most survivors live in Rajasthan’s Thar Desert, with a few in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2023] Consider the following statements: 1. In India, the Biodiversity Management Committees are key to the realization of the objectives of the Nagoya Protocol. 2. The Biodiversity Management Committees have important functions in determining acces and benefit sharing, including the power to levy collection fees on the access of biological resources within its jurisdiction. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 ANSWER: (c)”

  • 2 captive-bred Great Indian Bustards released in national park

    Why in the News

    For the first time, Great Indian Bustards (GIBs) bred in captivity have been returned to the wild, as conservation moves from raising birds in enclosures to rewilding them. The Union Environment Minister and Wildlife Institute of India (WII) scientists released two males into Desert National Park, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan, under Project GIB. Only about 150 GIBs are left in the wild.

    What is Project GIB, and why breed the bird in captivity?

    1. What it is: Project GIB is a long-term recovery programme for the critically endangered GIB. It runs two conservation breeding centres in Jaisalmer, at Ramdevra and Sam.
    2. Why it began: The wild population kept falling, so the centres raise a founder population, a starter stock for rewilding. It works like a seed bank kept for replanting a forest.
    3. How breeding works: From 2019, eggs collected from the wild were incubated artificially and the chicks hand-reared. These hand-reared birds later mated in captivity.
    4. Habitat restoration: The Rajasthan forest department has fenced about 200 sq km of grassland enclosures inside the park. WII has tracked tagged birds remotely for years (telemetry), and this data identifies the enclosures as prime breeding habitat.
    5. The takeaway: Captive breeding matters only if the birds survive in the wild, which this first release begins to test.

    What has the release achieved?

    1. First rewilding: Two male birds were released at Sam, the first of 11 birds earmarked for release.
    2. Captive stock: The centres hold 98 captive-bred birds, about 86 of them kept for captive reproduction.
    3. Breeding output: Captive reproduction yields more live chicks each year, with 29 born in 2026 against 24 in 2025.
    4. Reintroduction protocols: The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change says the release will help develop and refine protocols for returning captive-bred birds to natural habitat.

    Why does the GIB matter beyond the species?

    1. Grassland conservation: The GIB depends on open grassland, so protecting it protects an ecosystem often treated as wasteland. The Minister also linked it to land degradation neutrality, a goal where restored land offsets newly degraded land.
    2. Migratory stopover: GIB habitat is a resting stop for birds on the Central Asian Flyway. This migratory corridor crosses 30 countries from North to South Asia, linking the Arctic and Indian Oceans.

    Challenges

    1. Power line collisions: GIBs have poor frontal vision and fly into overhead transmission lines. Eg. The Supreme Court has heard cases on undergrounding lines in GIB habitat since 2021.
    2. Untested survival: Hand-reared birds have not learned predator avoidance or foraging from wild parents, so post-release survival is unknown.
    3. Narrow genetic base: A tiny wild population limits the genetic diversity of the founder stock.
    4. Grassland diversion: Open grasslands are converted to farming and renewable energy parks. Eg. Solar and wind projects in the Thar.

    Way Forward

    1. Post-release tracking: WII should tag every released bird and publish survival data before scaling up releases.
    2. Line mitigation: Power utilities should underground lines or fit bird diverters in priority GIB habitat.
    3. Grassland recognition: Rajasthan should record grasslands as ecosystems, not wasteland, in land records.
    4. Phased releases: Release the remaining earmarked birds in stages, adjusting protocols after each cohort.

    Conclusion

    Project GIB has moved from breeding numbers to the harder test of survival in the wild. Whether the released males survive, settle in the fenced enclosures and pair with wild birds is the metric to watch.

    Back2Basics: Great Indian Bustard

    1. Protection status: Critically Endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List and listed in Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
    2. Identity: One of the heaviest flying birds, known locally as Godawan, and the State bird of Rajasthan.
    3. Habitat: Dry grasslands and scrub, with the largest population in Rajasthan, mainly in Desert National Park.
    4. Threats: Overhead power lines, windmills, noise and changes in landscape and cultivation.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2024] Consider the following statements: Statement-I: The Indian Flying Fox is placed under the “vermin” category in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Statement-II: The Indian Flying Fox feeds on the blood of other animals. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (a) Both statement I and Statement II are correct and statement II explains statement I (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I (c) Staement- I is correct , but Statement II is incorrect* (d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct ANSWER:”

  • Rescue act

    Why in the News

    Tiger conservation in West Bengal has shifted from protecting a resident population to rebuilding one from nothing, as a royal Bengal tigress caught in Bihar becomes the first tiger reintroduced in the State, in Buxa Tiger Reserve. The step has been called “a triumph of bureaucracy, not ecology”, because the State acted only after its tigers had vanished.

    What is the Buxa reintroduction programme?

    1. What it is: Reintroduction means moving animals from a healthy population into a habitat that has lost them, much like restocking an empty shelf.
    2. Why it began: The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) found no tigers in the Buxa, Dampa and Palamau reserves by 2018. It proposed a programme with the Bengal Forest Department and the Wildlife Institute of India.
    3. Scale of the plan: The tigress is the first of seven tigers to be relocated to Buxa over two years.
    4. Habitat preparation: Since 2018 the partners have reintroduced chital (spotted deer), opened some forest canopy to revive grasslands, and moved villagers out of the reserve’s core to cut human wildlife conflict.
    5. The takeaway: Bringing tigers back is technically possible, but it does not by itself remove the pressures that emptied the reserve.

    Why did Buxa lose its tigers?

    1. Human settlement: Buxa is dotted with settlements and ringed by revenue villages and tea estates, which fragment the landscape, including migration corridors, the routes animals use to move between forests.
    2. Railway line: A railway line already threatens the region’s elephants, and the railways plan to restore a route to Jainti.
    3. Road traffic: Commercial traffic on the Bhutan to West Bengal road through Buxa disturbs the reserve.
    4. Closed canopy: Forests have grown into dense woodland with a closed canopy, which stifles grasses, so herbivore numbers dwindle.
    5. Prey collapse: Chital density is dismal, so goats, macaques and cattle now replace tigers’ preferred ungulates (hoofed prey).

    Is reintroduction conservation or rescue?

    1. Preventive model: From 1973 India followed preventive conservation, protecting source populations, the healthy groups that breed and supply tigers, with their habitats, prey and corridors.
    2. Reactive tradition: Buxa belongs to a newer, reactive tradition, alongside Sariska and Panna, where authorities intervened only after tiger populations crashed.
    3. Cost of rescue: Reintroduction showcases technical capability but is more expensive and more heavy handed than prevention.
    4. Inviolate core belief: Reintroduction follows Project Tiger’s belief that core habitat must be inviolate, meaning free of people. The state has used this to override the rights of Adivasis and forest dwellers and disrupt ecotourism incomes.

    What would success at Buxa look like?

    1. Transboundary corridor: Buxa is part of an international wildlife corridor contiguous with Phibsoo in Bhutan to the north and Manas in Assam to the east.
    2. Dispersal risk: If those forests offer more prey or less disturbance, released tigers may leave Buxa.
    3. Breeding test: Success means tigers establish territories and produce cubs that survive and breed, with natural immigration, tigers arriving on their own from nearby forests, keeping genetic diversity.
    4. Advance, not rescue: Success also means monitoring ecological deterioration so the state acts before tigers vanish, and involving local communities in decisions on conflict and livelihoods.

    Challenges

    1. Conflict after release: Tigers straying into tea estates and villages can turn local opinion against the programme. Eg. Tigress Avni was shot in Maharashtra in 2018.
    2. Poaching pressure: A small founder group can be wiped out quickly. Eg. Panna lost all its tigers by 2009.
    3. Rights conflicts: Relocation must be voluntary under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, so coercion invites legal challenge.

    Way Forward

    1. Prey before predators: The State Forest Department should raise chital density through grassland management before further releases.
    2. Rail mitigation: The railways should fix speed limits and build animal underpasses on forest stretches.
    3. Community dividend: Route ecotourism revenue to fringe villages through eco development committees.

    Conclusion

    Buxa’s first tigress restores a species but not yet the conditions that lost it. Whether tiger conservation moves from rescuing reserves after collapse to watching for decline early, with forest communities as partners, remains unresolved.

    Back2Basics: National Tiger Conservation Authority

    1. About: A statutory body under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, created through a 2006 amendment, under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
    2. Chair and role: Chaired by the Union Environment Minister, it approves State tiger conservation plans and sets norms for tiger reserves.
    3. Project Tiger: It runs Project Tiger, which manages reserves through a core and buffer design.
    4. Tiger census: It conducts the All India Tiger Estimation every four years.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2024] Consider the following statements: Statement-I: The Indian Flying Fox is placed under the “vermin” category in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Statement-II: The Indian Flying Fox feeds on the blood of other animals. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (a) Both statement I and Statement II are correct and statement II explains statement I (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I (c) Staement- I is correct , but Statement II is incorrect* (d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct Answer:”

  • To save tigers, follow crime beyond the reserve

    Why in the News

    An assessment by TRAFFIC, a global non-profit that monitors trade in wild animals and plants, documents 2,551 seizures involving at least 3,808 tigers over 25 years to June 2025. Conservation has moved from isolated reserves to connected landscapes, but wildlife crime management has not made the same transition.

    Why is the tiger reserve no longer the frontline of protection?

    1. Two landscapes: A tiger’s ecological landscape runs from the protected area (PA) through buffers and corridors to human settlements. Traffickers work in an overlapping crime landscape, from poacher to collector, transit, market and consumer.
    2. Tigers on the move: Tigers cross buffers, corridors, plantations, farms, riverine strips and town edges, which leads to human-tiger conflict.
    3. Source, not boundary: The reserve remains the biological source, like a nursery. A tiger safe inside it becomes vulnerable in poorly monitored corridors.
    4. Information for criminals: Tigers moving repeatedly through poorly watched areas show poachers where to find them, so PA boundaries cannot remain the only line of protection.
    5. The takeaway: Tigers now live and die across a landscape that the reserve system was never designed to guard.

    How has tiger trafficking changed?

    1. Old geography of crime: Crime once meant poachers breaching a reserve and traders waiting outside, so protection meant patrolling, intelligence and intrusion detection. These remain indispensable.
    2. New products: Trafficking has moved from skin and bone to whole animals, dead and alive, and a wider range of derivatives.
    3. Linked networks: Tiger traffickers often share networks with the trade in leopard, bear and pangolin parts.
    4. New channels: Criminals use digital platforms, transport systems, financial channels and intermediaries far beyond traditional wildlife traders.

    What is a Tiger Crime Opportunity Surface, and who should act on it?

    1. Layered map: A “Tiger Crime Opportunity Surface” overlays young tigers’ dispersal routes, farm crossings, conflict villages, past offences and transport nodes. It shows where vulnerability and criminal opportunity meet.
    2. Act before mortality: The aim is to act before a tiger dies rather than investigate afterwards.
    3. Graded response: The same camera trap alert would trigger different action by zone: routine monitoring inside a PA, community preparedness in a conflict area, or extra patrols and intelligence gathering.
    4. Protection by zone: Inside the reserve, protection stays intensive and tiger specific. Beyond it, forest guards cannot carry the load alone.
    5. Inclusive enforcement: Protection should be intelligence-led, involving territorial forest staff, local communities, police, enforcement agencies and cyber or financial crime experts.

    Why do arrests not end tiger trafficking?

    1. Seizures without disruption: Isolated seizures and arrests rarely dismantle the systems that produce the crime.
    2. Missing kingpins: Cases usually target low and mid-level actors. Organisers and financiers are rarely booked.
    3. Follow the money: Cases must continue beyond arrest into financial investigation and network disruption.

    Challenges

    1. Thin territorial staff: Territorial forest divisions, where dispersing tigers roam, have fewer trained wildlife staff than reserves.
    2. Online trade: Wildlife products are sold through social media and messaging apps, beyond a forest guard’s reach.
    3. Weak financial probes: Wildlife cases rarely involve money-laundering investigators, so financiers escape.
    4. Community distrust: Villages losing crops and cattle to tigers may withhold information from forest staff.

    Way Forward

    1. Landscape crime maps: The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) should require every tiger landscape to build and update an opportunity surface.
    2. Joint task forces: States should form forest, police and cyber units for corridors and transport hubs.
    3. Financial tracing: The Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) should work with financial intelligence agencies to trace traffickers’ money.
    4. Prompt compensation: States should pay quickly for tiger damage to keep communities on the side of protection.

    Conclusion

    Tiger conservation now plans for connected landscapes, but crime control is still organised around reserve boundaries and low-level arrests. The test is whether forest, police and financial agencies begin to share one intelligence system across each tiger landscape.

    Government Initiatives for Tiger Conservation

    1. Project Tiger (1973): Manages tiger reserves on a core-buffer model to reduce habitat pressure and human-tiger contact.
    2. Tigers Outside Tiger Reserves (TOTR): Uses artificial intelligence, GPS and camera surveillance to manage conflict involving about 30 per cent of tigers that live outside reserves.
    3. Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2006: Created the NTCA and the WCCB, and requires tiger conservation plans to protect corridors linking reserves.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2024] Consider the following statements: Statement-I: The Indian Flying Fox is placed under the “vermin” category in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Statement-II: The Indian Flying Fox feeds on the blood of other animals. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (a) Both statement I and Statement II are correct and statement II explains statement I (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I (c) Staement- I is correct , but Statement II is incorrect* (d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct”

  • New cat in habitat, and some glimmer of hope

    Why in the News

    A new species of wild cat, Leopardus tilcayo, has been described in Bolivia, the first feline species identified in a hundred years. A new penguin species, also the first in a century, has been described on a group of subantarctic islands, and a new snake species has been described in New Guinea. A 2025 University of Arizona study records that 15 per cent of all known species were described in the last 20 years. The tension the item raises is that species are being found faster than ever at the same moment that loss of species dominates public attention, and that most of these discoveries reach no audience beyond the scientific and conservation communities.

    What has actually been described?

    1. A new wild cat: Leopardus tilcayo has been described in Bolivia. It is the first discovery of a feline species in a hundred years, which is why it drew the loudest response of the three.
    2. A new penguin: A new penguin species has been described on a group of subantarctic islands, and it too is the first in its group in a century.
    3. A new snake: A new snake species has been described in New Guinea and named after the guitarist Slash.
    4. What a description is: A species is described when a specimen is formally published with a diagnosis separating it from every named relative and a binomial name. Recognition of the animal by local communities usually long predates the formal description.

    Why is the rate of description rising?

    1. The measured pace: The 2025 University of Arizona study finds that 15 per cent of all known species were described in the last 20 years, so the quest to identify every species has accelerated rather than exhausted itself.
    2. Genetic tools separate look alike populations: DNA sequencing distinguishes populations that field observation had grouped as one species, which converts a known animal into two or more named ones.
    3. Survey effort has widened: Camera traps, acoustic recorders and systematic surveys in regions that were never surveyed intensively produce records that no expedition method previously returned.
    4. Museum collections are being re examined: Specimens collected decades ago and shelved without close study are now being sequenced, and some are found to belong to undescribed species.

    Why do most of these discoveries go unnoticed?

    1. The preference for the photogenic: Public and media attention follows animals that are visually appealing, which is why a wild cat and a penguin were reported and the invertebrate descriptions of the same period were not.
    2. Attention decides funding: Conservation money follows public interest, so charismatic vertebrates draw project funding while the taxa that carry most of the planet’s species diversity do not.
    3. The scale of what is unrecorded: Most described species are insects and other invertebrates, and the undescribed share of global diversity sits overwhelmingly in those groups rather than among mammals and birds.

    Challenges to protecting newly described species

    1. A name confers no protection: Formal description creates a scientific record, not a legal status, and assessment and listing are separate processes that follow it. Eg. An International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List assessment and a Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species listing are each decided after a species has been named.
      The Fix: Grant an interim protected status on description, lapsing once a formal assessment is completed.
    2. Publicity raises collection pressure: A newly named species with a small known range becomes a target for private collectors and the exotic pet trade, and the published description tells them where to look. Eg. Newly described reptiles and amphibians have appeared in the international pet trade shortly after their descriptions were published.
      The Fix: Withhold precise locality coordinates from published descriptions of small range species and release them only to designated authorities.
    3. Taxonomy has too few working specialists: The number of trained taxonomists able to describe a group has fallen while the backlog of collected specimens has grown. Eg. Specimens from tropical surveys routinely wait years in museum collections before anyone describes them.
      The Fix: Fund standing taxonomy positions tied to national collections and digitise specimen records so that identification is not gated on a single expert.
    4. Splitting one species into several shrinks each unit: When genetic work divides a widespread population into separate species, each resulting species holds a smaller range and a smaller population than the original did. Eg. A taxon once assessed as secure can yield two narrowly distributed species that each qualify as threatened.
      The Fix: Require a conservation reassessment of every resulting species immediately after a taxonomic split, rather than at the next scheduled review.
    5. Habitat is lost faster than it is surveyed: Land conversion in the regions that hold the most undescribed diversity removes populations before anyone records that they existed. Eg. Andean and New Guinean forests, where two of these three species were found, are under conversion and fragmentation pressure.
      The Fix: Protect habitat at the landscape level in high endemism regions rather than species by species after each description.

    Conclusion

    The rate of description and the rate of loss are both rising, and the two are not in tension, because a species can be named and lost within the same decade. What the description of a large mammal after a hundred year gap establishes is that the inventory is far from complete, which undercuts any assumption that conservation is working on a known list. The part that remains unaddressed is the gap between naming a species and protecting it, since nothing in the act of description obliges any state to do anything. What to watch is whether these three species receive conservation assessments and any protected status, and how quickly.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “No direct PYQ traced in the provided files”

  • Saving the rhino, restoring grasslands

    Why in the News

    The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has set out a shift in India’s rhino conservation strategy on World Rhino Day, September 22, from safeguarding existing concentrations of the greater one-horned rhinoceros to establishing secure populations across suitable parts of its historical range. The framework for that shift is the National Conservation Strategy for the rhinoceros, launched in 2019, which had already committed to restoring the species to suitable former habitats. The species has recovered from around 1,500 animals in the 1980s to more than 4,000 as of September 2024. The recovery now runs into a habitat problem rather than a protection problem, because the grasslands the species depends on degrade without active management.

    What is the National Conservation Strategy for the rhinoceros?

    1. Scope of the strategy: It provides the framework for strengthening existing rhino populations and for restoring the species to suitable former habitats.
    2. Genetic and spatial security: It commits to maintaining genetic security and habitat connectivity, so separated populations do not become isolated breeding units.
    3. Planned movement of animals: It promotes scientifically planned translocation, the deliberate capture and release of animals into a new site to found a population there.
    4. Climate in the protection framework: It recognises climate-resilient management as part of the protection framework for the species rather than as a separate exercise.

    Where does the rhino live now, and where did it once live?

    1. Present distribution: The wild population in India is concentrated mainly in Assam, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
    2. Historical range: The animal’s range extended across the northern Indian Subcontinent, along the Indus, Ganga and Brahmaputra river systems.
    3. The two landscapes it belongs to: It is an integral part of the ecological and cultural landscape of the Brahmaputra floodplains and the Terai grasslands.
    4. The strategic consequence: Conservation confined to existing concentrations leaves most of that historical range empty, which is the gap range expansion is meant to close.

    What does Phase I of the range expansion commit to?

    1. Duration and funding route: The five-year Phase I runs from 2026 to 2031 and is proposed for support through the National CAMPA Authority, which holds compensatory afforestation funds collected when forest land is diverted.
    2. States brought together: It covers Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
    3. Named focus areas: Scientific monitoring, protection, habitat restoration and management, translocation planning, coexistence and capacity building.
    4. The expansion target: Beyond consolidating existing populations, it seeks to support the species’ expansion into suitable areas in Bihar and Arunachal Pradesh.
    5. The habitat instrument: The Rhino Conservation Action Plan provides for mapping grasslands and wetlands, identifying invasive species, prioritising habitats for intensive restoration and developing management protocols specific to each protected area.

    Why does saving the rhino depend on how grasslands and floodplains are managed?

    1. Grasslands as dynamic systems: Grasslands require science-based management to prevent degradation, inappropriate succession, meaning the drift of grassland into woody cover, and the spread of invasive species.
    2. Species riding on the same habitat: Rhino habitat also carries swamp deer, wild buffalo, elephants, tigers, grassland birds and several smaller species, so habitat condition decides outcomes well beyond one animal.
    3. A national grassland assessment: A five-year project running from 2026 to 2031 on the Comprehensive Assessment of Indian Grasslands will be implemented by the Wildlife Institute of India, the Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education and the Forest Survey of India.
    4. What it will measure: It will assess grassland extent, ecological condition, biodiversity, degradation, ecosystem services and carbon potential, and will support a National Grassland Atlas, restoration priorities and long-term management guidelines.
    5. Flooding as a design condition: Flooding is intrinsic to landscapes such as Kaziranga, and the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme climatic events create new conservation pressures on top of it.
    6. What flood management requires: Maintaining access to higher ground, securing ecological connectivity, protecting dispersal routes and managing habitats are the named requirements.

    Who actually delivers protection on the ground?

    1. What technology adds: Modern surveillance, spatial monitoring, veterinary diagnostics, genetic tools and decision-support systems reinforce traditional fieldcraft.
    2. What technology cannot replace: No technology substitutes the forest guards, watchers, mahouts, veterinarians and field officers who patrol these landscapes.
    3. Communities around the habitat: The communities living around rhino habitats are equally important to the outcome, since the animals move through land those communities use.
    4. Conservation as shared enterprise: The future of the species depends on conservation being treated as a shared enterprise rather than an isolated governmental activity.

    How far does cooperation extend beyond national boundaries?

    1. The regional forum: The Second Asian Rhino Range States Conservation Meeting was held in New Delhi in 2019.
    2. The New Delhi Declaration: India joined Bhutan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Nepal in adopting the Declaration to strengthen conservation cooperation for Asian rhinoceros species.
    3. What followed: The Centre and the rhino-bearing states have continued to work within that broader framework, which places a domestic range expansion inside a regional commitment.

    Challenges to rhino range expansion

    1. Founder population size at a new site: A population begun from a few released animals carries low genetic variation and can fail to establish. Eg. Rhinos moved to Manas National Park under Indian Rhino Vision 2020 were lost to poaching in the years after release, setting that site back.
      The Fix: Fix a minimum release cohort and sex ratio for each new site before a release is authorised, with monitoring obligations running for a set number of years afterwards.
    2. Invaded habitat at the release site: Grassland taken over by weedy or woody cover no longer carries the grazing biomass a rhino needs, so a site can be legally protected and biologically unsuitable. Eg. Mikania micrantha has spread through Kaziranga’s grasslands and displaced native forage.
      The Fix: Make invasive removal and a measured forage-biomass threshold conditions of certifying a site as suitable, rather than treating protected status as sufficient.
    3. Mortality outside the protected area during floods: Animals leaving a flooded park cross roads and settlements, so deaths occur where the park’s protection does not reach. Eg. Animals crossing from Kaziranga to the Karbi Anglong hills during floods are killed by vehicles on the national highway that separates the two.
      The Fix: Complete elevated animal passages on the highway stretches identified as crossing points and enforce speed restrictions through the flood months.
    4. Persistent demand for horn: The horn holds high value in illegal trade, so the cost of protection does not fall as the population grows. Eg. Assam publicly burned a stockpile of over 2,400 rhino horns in 2021 to signal that the horn carries no medicinal value.
      The Fix: Extend stockpile audits and DNA profiling of seized horn to every rhino-bearing state, so a seizure can be traced back to the population it came from.

    Conclusion

    The rhino’s recovery was achieved inside a small number of well-protected areas, and it is a genuine result. Expansion asks a harder question, whether land outside those areas can be brought to a condition that will hold a founder population and keep it. That makes habitat condition, and not animal numbers, the binding constraint on the next phase. What to watch is whether the programme begins reporting grassland condition alongside population counts, because a range that cannot feed the species is not range.

    Grasslands in India

    1. Extent and loss: Grassland area has declined by 31 per cent, from 18 million hectares to 12.3 million hectares, and common lands by 19 per cent, from 90.5 million hectares to 73.02 million hectares.
    2. Conversion pressure: Humans have converted 70 per cent of the world’s grasslands and 50 per cent of savannahs for agriculture and grazing, compacting soil and accelerating desertification.
    3. Species that depend on them: Grassland conversion has contributed to the decline of the Great Indian Bustard and the Lesser Florican.
    4. Invasive spread: Prosopis juliflora is spreading across Rajasthan and degrading grassland there.

    Government Initiatives for wildlife habitat conservation

    1. Project Tiger (1973): Uses core and buffer reserve management to reduce habitat pressure and limit human-tiger interaction in tiger-bearing landscapes.
    2. Project Elephant (1992): Protects elephant habitats and corridors, which reduces crop damage and accidental deaths in the districts those corridors run through.
    3. National Wildlife Action Plan (2017-31): Sets the national agenda on habitat conservation, protection of endangered species and coexistence strategies.
    4. Mission Sahbhagita (2022) and the Save Wetlands Campaign (2023): Mobilised more than 2 million citizens, resulting in the ground-truthing of over 170,000 wetlands and boundary demarcation of nearly 100,000 of them.

    Back2Basics: Greater one-horned rhinoceros

    1. Conservation status: Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List, listed in CITES Appendix I, and placed in Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
    2. The only rhino in India: It is the sole rhino species found in India, also called the Indian rhino, and is Asia’s largest rhino among the five rhino species worldwide.
    3. Core protected areas: Pabitora Wildlife Reserve, Rajiv Gandhi Orang National Park, Kaziranga National Park and Manas National Park.
    4. Identification: A single black horn and a grey-brown hide with pronounced skin folds, and it is an excellent swimmer.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2019] Consider the following statements: 1. Asiatic lion is naturally found In India only. 2. Double-humped camel is naturally found in India only. 3. One-horned rhinoceros is naturally found in India only. Which of the statements given above is / are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) 1 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 (a)”

  • Research team documents 3,261 flowering plant species in Agasthyamalai reserve

    Why in the News

    A research team at the Jawaharlal Nehru Tropical Botanic Garden and Research Institute (JNTBGRI), Thiruvananthapuram, has compiled the first comprehensive checklist of the flowering plants of the Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve (ABR). The checklist records 3,261 species, 26 sub species and 28 varieties. It has been published in the journal Plant Science Today. The work reaffirms the global significance of the Western Ghats as a biodiversity hotspot. It also states a claim that follows from the data, that protection of the range requires focussed, region specific strategies rather than a uniform one.

    What does the checklist actually record?

    1. Taxa documented: The team documented 3,261 species, 26 sub species and 28 varieties in the Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve.
    2. Taxonomic spread: Those taxa belong to 1,139 genera across 190 families.
    3. Standing claim it supports: The scale of the reserve’s floral wealth upholds its position as one of the most significant centres of angiosperm diversity and endemism in the Indian subcontinent.
    4. Publication: The checklist has been published in Plant Science Today as the Comprehensive checklist of the flowering plants of the Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve, South India.

    Which families dominate the reserve’s flora?

    1. Fabaceae leads: The legume family Fabaceae is the most species rich in the reserve with 349 taxa.
    2. Rubiaceae: The coffee family Rubiaceae follows with 194 taxa.
    3. Poaceae: The grass family Poaceae records 193 taxa.
    4. Orchidaceae: The orchid family Orchidaceae records 168 taxa, and Paphiopedilum druryi, an orchid endemic to Agasthyamalai, sits within it.

    What does the endemism pattern show?

    1. Share endemic to India: A remarkably high level of endemism was recorded, with 1,018 taxa, or 31.2 per cent of the total, endemic to India.
    2. Narrow range endemics: That figure includes 245 steno endemic taxa, meaning taxa confined to highly specialised habitats within a very small range.
    3. What narrow endemism implies: A taxon restricted to one specialised habitat cannot relocate when that habitat is altered, so the loss of a single slope or stream margin can remove it entirely.

    What do the shared taxa say about the reserve’s biogeography?

    1. Affinity with Sri Lanka: The flora shows a strong biogeographic affinity with Sri Lanka, with the two regions sharing 347 taxa.
    2. Explanations offered: The reasons range from historical land connections during periods of lower sea level, to a shared Gondwanan history, to long term climatic similarities.
    3. A transatlantic element: 102 taxa display affinity with tropical American flora.
    4. How that is explained: That pattern possibly reflects long distance dispersal events, or naturalisation after introduction by humans.

    Why does a region specific checklist matter for conservation?

    1. Baseline for protection: A complete inventory establishes what exists before change is measured, which is the precondition for any claim that a species has been lost.
    2. Fragility of the landscape: The hill systems and vegetation of the reserve constitute a biologically unique yet ecologically fragile landscape.
    3. Administrative spread: The reserve is spread over Keralam and Tamil Nadu, so any protection strategy has to work across two State administrations.
    4. Position among reserves: The ABR is one of four biosphere reserves in south India, which places the checklist within a comparable set rather than as an isolated record.

    Challenges to conserving the Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve

    1. Fragmentation of the habitat: Plantation estates, roads and reservoirs cut continuous forest into blocks and isolate the populations of narrow range plants. Eg. Tea and cardamom estates in the Agasthyamalai landscape sit between the protected blocks of the reserve.
      The Fix: Notify and restore the identified corridor stretches between the reserve’s blocks as eco restoration zones under the State forest working plans.
    2. Invasive species displacement: Introduced plants colonise disturbed ground and crowd out the endemic understorey that the checklist records. Eg. Lantana camara and Mikania micrantha have spread widely through Western Ghats forest margins.
      The Fix: Fund a scheduled removal and native replanting cycle at forest edges, with monitoring keyed to the checklist’s endemic taxa.
    3. Collection pressure on high value taxa: Orchids and medicinal plants with narrow ranges face extraction for horticulture and for the herbal trade. Eg. Paphiopedilum druryi, endemic to Agasthyamalai, has been depleted by collection from the wild.
      The Fix: Place the steno endemic taxa on the State’s restricted collection list and pair it with nursery propagation at JNTBGRI to supply legitimate demand.
    4. Split administration across two States: A single ecological unit managed by two State forest departments produces divergent rules on the same slope. Eg. The reserve is spread over Keralam and Tamil Nadu with separate working plans on each side.
      The Fix: Constitute a standing joint management committee for the reserve with a common monitoring protocol and a shared annual report.
    5. Climate driven upslope shift: Warming pushes montane species upward, and taxa already at the summit ranges have nowhere to move. Eg. Shola grassland systems in the higher Western Ghats are already recording shifts in species composition.
      The Fix: Establish permanent altitudinal monitoring plots along the reserve’s elevation gradient, so range shifts are detected against the new baseline rather than inferred later.

    Conclusion

    The reserve now has a documented floristic baseline where it previously had none. The value of that baseline is that endemism can be located precisely, down to taxa confined to single specialised habitats, which is what makes uniform protection inadequate for this landscape. The finding the checklist leaves unresolved is how two State administrations manage one ecological unit against a single standard. What follows is whether the endemic taxa the list identifies are translated into a protected species schedule and a monitoring cycle.

    Back2Basics: Agasthyamalai Biosphere Reserve

    1. Designation: It was designated a biosphere reserve in 2001 and was added to the UNESCO World Network of Biosphere Reserves in 2016.
    2. Location: It lies in the southern Western Ghats across Keralam and Tamil Nadu, and takes its name from the Agasthyamalai peak.
    3. Constituent protected areas: It includes Neyyar, Peppara and Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuaries and the Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve.
    4. Cultural association: The Kani tribal community inhabits the landscape and its knowledge of the plant Trichopus zeylanicus produced India’s first benefit sharing arrangement for traditional knowledge.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2019] Which of the following are in Agasthyamala Biosphere Reserve? (a) Neyyar, Peppara and Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuaries; and Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve (b) Mudumalai, Sathyamangalam and Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuaries; and Silent Valley National Park (c) Kaundinya, Gundla Brahme-swaram and Papikonda Wildlife Sanctuaries; and Mukurthi National Park (d) Kawal and Sri Venkateswara Wildlife Sanctuaries; and Nagarjunasagar-Srisailam Tiger Reserve | Answer: (a)”

  • Conservation, compensation: Tackling Himachal monkey menace

    Why in the News

    A 63 year old woman in Shimla has died of injuries, including spinal damage, sustained when a pack of rhesus macaques attacked her on the roof of her house. The death has returned attention to the legal position of the species. The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 had listed the rhesus macaque as a protected species under Part I of Schedule II. The Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022 removed it from that listing. The contest now is that responsibility has passed from State forest departments to urban local bodies without the funds, the trained staff or the compensation cover moving with it.

    What changed for the rhesus macaque after the 2022 amendment?

    1. Loss of protected status: The 2022 amendment removed the rhesus macaque from Part I of Schedule II of the parent Act, ending its treatment as a protected species.
    2. Transfer of responsibility: The Chief Wildlife Warden of Himachal Pradesh has stated that State forest departments are no longer responsible for the monkey menace.
    3. Reclassification in practice: A monkey is now treated like a stray animal, which places it within the purview of civic bodies rather than of the wildlife administration.
    4. Central funding stopped: State forest departments earlier received funds from the Centre to control the monkey menace, and that flow ended once the species ceased to be protected.

    Why are urban local bodies not equipped to take this on?

    1. Absence of funds: A senior Indian Forest Service officer has identified the lack of funds as the first reason urban local bodies such as the Shimla Municipal Corporation are not fully competent to handle the task independently.
    2. No trained manpower: The second stated reason is the absence of expertise and trained manpower to capture monkeys and to sterilise the captured animals.
    3. Capacity is still being built: The Shimla Municipal Commissioner has stated that the corporation is in the process of training its manpower on how to capture monkeys, and takes the assistance of the forest department when a situation arises.
    4. Assistance is now priced: The forest department continues to intervene largely in and around forest areas and charges urban local bodies for capture and sterilisation, at a cost of Rs 700 per monkey sterilised.

    What do the population and incidence numbers show?

    1. A falling population: Official numbers show Himachal Pradesh’s estimated rhesus macaque population fell from 3,17,512 in 2004 to 2,26,086 in 2013, and then to 1,36,443 in 2019 to 2020.
    2. Sterilisation as the stated cause: The State forest department attributes much of that decline to sustained sterilisation, having sterilised 1,86,448 monkeys between 2006 and March 2024.
    3. Conflict has not fallen with numbers: Shimla Municipal Corporation officials record 50 to 55 cases of monkey attack every month in the city.

    Why has compensation become the sharper grievance?

    1. Existing entitlements: Under the Himachal Pradesh wildlife compensation policy cited by officials, severe monkey attack injuries attract Rs 75,000, permanent disability Rs 1 lakh and death Rs 4 lakh.
    2. Delisting closes the door: Since the rhesus macaque is no longer covered by the Act, officials have indicated that the deceased woman’s family is unlikely to qualify under this framework.
    3. The demand on the ground: A Shimla based non governmental organisation has protested outside the Municipal Commissioner’s office demanding compensation of Rs 5 lakh for the deceased woman.
    4. A parallel demand on behaviour: The same protest demanded stricter action against those found feeding monkeys in Shimla.

    Why is the vermin versus protected species question still unsettled?

    1. Opinion is divided: A wildlife expert has recorded that opinion remains split on whether monkeys should be treated as vermin or as a protected animal, despite rapid population growth.
    2. Human behaviour drives the conflict: Public feeding of wild animals, including monkeys, forces animals out of the forest in search of easy food, which locates the cause of conflict outside the species itself.
    3. Delisting answers only the legal question: Removing protection settles who is liable and does not settle whether culling, sterilisation or behaviour control is the correct instrument.

    Challenges to managing human macaque conflict after delisting

    1. Mismatch between mandate and capacity: Responsibility now sits with municipal bodies that have neither wildlife budgets nor trained handlers, while the expertise stays in a department that is no longer accountable for the outcome. Eg. Shimla Municipal Corporation must pay the forest department Rs 700 an animal for a service it cannot perform itself.
      The Fix: Fund a standing joint capture and sterilisation cell staffed by the forest department and paid for from the municipal budget, so the mandate and the skill sit in one unit.
    2. Compensation vanishes with protected status: A State compensation policy keyed to species listed under the Act leaves victims of a delisted species with no claim, even where the injury is identical. Eg. The Shimla family faces a death under a schedule that no longer covers the animal responsible.
      The Fix: Rewrite the State compensation policy to key entitlement to the injury and the location rather than to the schedule the animal sits in.
    3. Sterilisation without an exit point: A programme that runs for two decades without a stated target population becomes a permanent budget line rather than a solution. Eg. 1,86,448 monkeys were sterilised between 2006 and March 2024 while attack incidence in Shimla stayed at 50 to 55 cases a month.
      The Fix: Set a district level target population with published annual monitoring, so the programme is measured against conflict incidence rather than against animals processed.
    4. Food subsidy from human waste: Open garbage and religious and recreational feeding supply a reliable calorie source that sustains urban troop numbers regardless of sterilisation. Eg. Shimla’s hill slope waste collection points and temple precincts draw troops into residential areas.
      The Fix: Enforce monkey proof waste containment along the affected wards and prosecute feeding under municipal bye laws with a stated penalty.
    5. Vermin declarations are politically fraught and short lived: Section 62 of the parent Act allows the Centre to declare a species vermin for a limited period in a specified area, and such notifications draw litigation and lapse without resolving the problem. Eg. Himachal Pradesh’s earlier vermin notification for rhesus macaques was repeatedly renewed and then allowed to lapse.
      The Fix: Replace episodic vermin notifications with a standing conflict management plan that fixes responsibility, funding and compensation irrespective of the species’ schedule.

    Conclusion

    The 2022 delisting shifted the rhesus macaque from a conservation problem to a municipal nuisance without shifting the money, the staff or the compensation cover to match. The result is a hill town recording 50 to 55 attacks a month with no department fully answerable for either prevention or redress. The status question that remains open is whether responsibility is returned to the forest department with funding, or left with civic bodies and financed properly. The next marker is whether Himachal Pradesh amends its wildlife compensation policy to cover injuries caused by species the Act no longer lists.

    Back2Basics: Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972

    1. Purpose: It is the central law providing for the protection of wild animals and plants and for the establishment of protected areas such as national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.
    2. Schedule structure after 2022: The 2022 amendment reduced the schedules, with Schedule I covering species receiving the highest protection, Schedule II covering species with lesser protection, Schedule III covering plants and Schedule IV listing species regulated under CITES.
    3. Vermin provision: Section 62 allows the Centre to declare a wild animal other than one in Schedule I to be vermin for a specified area and period, which removes protection for that duration.
    4. Administration: Each State has a Chief Wildlife Warden who exercises the Act’s powers over hunting permissions, captivity and the management of protected areas.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2024] Consider the following statements: Statement-I: The Indian Flying Fox is placed under the “vermin” category in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Statement-II: The Indian Flying Fox feeds on the blood of other animals. Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (a) Both statement I and Statement II are correct and statement II explains statement I (b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I (c) Staement- I is correct , but Statement II is incorrect* (d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct”