October 24. That should be a red-letter day in the calendar of all Goans including of those serving in the offices of the forest department.
The Supreme Court’s decision not to stay the High Court decision directing the Goa government to notify the ‘Mhadei Wildlife Sanctuary and other areas’ gives no scope as of now to the government to avoid declaring the said area as a Tiger Reserve by October 24. Of course, the progress of its appeal in the Supreme Court against the order may come into play if there is a specific direction. Importantly there isn’t any now. The petitioner in the Tiger Reserve PIL sought and got directions to the government, to notify Mhadei Wildlife Sanctuary and other areas as a “Tiger Reserve” under Chapter IV-B of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (WLPA).
So why is October 24 a red-letter day? Para 159 of the judgment of the Goa High Court bench dated July 24 in a PIL filed by the Goa Foundation, directed the State to notify the said area as a Tiger Reserve within three months of the judgment, which was pronounced on July 24 ie October 24. This is less than four weeks from now.
Sensitive governments will never neglect to make Tiger Reserves
Sensitive State governments and Goa have shown this sensitivity in the past, understanding that tiger protection is more than protecting this endangered species.
It is about protecting sensitive ecosystems, and biodiversity hotspots that get a chance to rejuvenate, protect and increase the green cover, protecting the soil and the vegetation, preserving and protecting water bodies, thereby leading to the overall enrichment of both man and animal.
Ministry of Environment & Forests has highlighted the need for Tiger Reserves. So can Goa disagree?
Moreover, the High Court in its July 24 Tiger Reserve judgment quoted a study by See Jhala Y, Gopal R, Mathur V, Ghosh P, Negi H S, Narain S, “Recovery of tigers in India: Critical introspection and potential”.
“The exhaustive studies undertaken or commissioned by the Central Ministry of Environment and Forest indicate the need for better-protected tiger source sites, especially Tiger Reserves, to maintain viable populations.” — Excerpt from the study.
“The studies note that the area occupied by tigers outside protected areas has decreased considerably. This demonstrates the need to protect the Tiger Corridors to facilitate the movement of tigers between source sites”- Excerpt from the study
A Tiger Reserve doesn’t only protect tigers, it preserves ecosystems for man. This is such a common sense point that there can never be any debate or disagreement about this, much less litigation.
This has to be seen as Goa vs the Centre and not Goa vs the petitioners, Goa Foundation
These portions are from the HC judgment of July 24 (justices Sonak and Deshpande) itself though the attempt on the part of central authorities including the National Tiger Conservation Authority chaired by the Union Minister of Forests to get Goa to notify a Tiger Reserve, have been many.
1 “Beginning in 2011, the Central Government and the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) repeatedly pursued the issue of the State of Goa (State) notifying Mhadei WLS and certain other contiguous areas as a Tiger Reserve. In January 2020, the petitioner and other environmentalists also pursued this issue after a tigress and her three cubs died from poisoning in the Mhadei WLS. However, since the State has refused to budge, the petitioner has instituted the present petition seeking the above reliefs in the public interest.”
2 Given these constitutional provisions, the least expected of the State was not to oppose or unreasonably delay the proposal for notifying an area as a Tiger Reserve when a high-powered, expert, central body, ie the NTCA, recommends its notification. Even the material on record in the form of Forest Department officials’ documentation & detailed studies, expert studies, etc., cries out for such notification if further damage is to be halted.
Before we conclude, the sense and tone of all that has been said is best explained by these words of the Supreme Court in another historic judgment. These few lines cover all one needs to be sensitive about preserving animal habitats.
Human interest does not take automatic precedence, and humans have obligations to non-humans
In T N Godavarman Thirumulpad (wild buffalo case) (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that eco-centrism is nature-centred, where humans are part of nature and non-humans have intrinsic value. In other words, human interest does not take automatic precedence, and humans have obligations to non-humans independently of human interest. Eco-centrism is life-centred and nature-centred, where nature includes both humans and non-humans.
For sensitive people and sensitive governments, this is so easy to understand.