Journal of Global Resources
Volume 4
ISSN: 2395-3160 (Print), 2455-2445 (Online)

January 2017

Page 45-53

6

UNDERSTANDING STAKEHOLDERS PERCEPTION TOWARDS WILDLIFE OF BLACKBUCK SANCTUARY OF TAL CHHAPAR, CHURU, RAJASTHAN, INDIA
Anju Ojha
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Geography, Govt. Lohia College, Churu, Rajastha, India
Email: draj2280@gmail.com
Abstract: Nature conservation is often understood to happen only within the limited
boundaries of protected areas, managed by government agencies. These are conceived as
islands of conservation where any form of human intervention is considered harmful for
conservation. There are Protected Areas intended for conservation of wildlife, which areproving to be islands of conservation. The Protected Area approach keeps local people
away from benefits of conservation and imposes cost of conservation on them, banishing
their fundamental rights, resulting into hostility of local community towards conservation
affecting the whole goal of conservation. The rapid growth in world’s population andindiscriminate use of natural resources are a consequence of land erosion, over fertilizationand problems of preserving forests, and wildlife. The assessment of ecological changes andof the beneficial use of land, water and air resources requires collective wisdom. Given thecurrent rate of increasing depletion of natural resources, the growing problems of ecology
might well become a major source of ‘internal strife’. Therefore, newer ways of conservationand promotion of wild life, and their distribution need to be evolved. The paper highlights
understanding stakeholder’s perception towards wild life.
Key words: Stakeholders, Perception, Wild Life, Black Buck, Conservation.
Introduction
The Wildlife (Protection) Act had little to encourage or mandate peoples’ participation inconservation, or to recognize areas conserved by communities. Two new categories ofProtected Areas were introduced into the Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act of that year,
namely Conservation Reserve and Community Reserve. Acknowledging the fact thatpeoples’ participation and traditional management systems have enormously contributed toforest and wildlife conservation in India, such a new direction to conserve patches as people
conserved Protected Areas carried lot of meaning. It was expected that having declaredcertain areas as Conservation Reserves and Community Reserves and building up
institutions around such Reserves for better protection and management there would be newlearning for forest and wildlife management. India is one of the 17 mega diverse countries of
the world. With only 2.4 percent of the world’s land area, 16.7 percent of the world’s humanpopulation and 18 percent livestock, it contributes about 8 percent of the known global
biodiversity, however, putting enormous demands on our natural resources. India is known
for its rich heritage of biodiversity. It is one of the recognized mega diverse countries of theworld. With an area of about 329 mha, India is seventh largest country in the world. India, amega diversity country with only 2.4 percent of the land area and 4 percent of fresh water,
accounts for 7-8 percent of the recorded species of the world. So far, 45,968 species ofplants and 91,364 species of animals have been documented. At the global level, 2,78,900
species of microorganisms have been described so far, out of the estimated 3.75 million
extant species.
There has been increasing realisation that forests provide numerous benefits to
mankind including improvement of the quality of environment. Forests provide goods andservices and maintain life support systems like timber, fuel wood, fodder, and a wide range
of non-timber products. Further, forests are a source of natural habitat for biodiversity andrepository of genetic wealth; provide means for recreation and opportunity for eco-tourism. In
45

addition, forests help in watershed development, regulate water regime, conserve soil, andcontrol floods. They contribute to process of carbon sequestration and act as carbon sink,
which is important for reduction of greenhouse gases and global warming. In ecologicallysensitive areas like mountains, as well as river catchments, forests play an important role forprevention of floods, etc. Degradation of forest resources has a detrimental effect on soil,
water and climate, which in turn affects human and animal life. This has created global
concern for protection and preservation of forests. It is important to recognize that thebenefits of natural forests are rather different than man-made forests. The ecologicalbenefits of natural forests are difficult to replicate in a man-made forest. Functions likecarbon-sequestration, would depend on topography, soil conditions, density of forests, etc.
The functions of forests both for the natural system as well as the social dimensions can be
briefly seen in the following statement. It may be mentioned that while natural forests
provide for all these functions, only some of these benefits may arise from man-madeforests.
Tal Chhapar Sanctuary
The sanctuary lies in the Sujangarh Tehsil which is located in the north eastern part of theThar desert at a latitude 27° 42’ north and longitude 74° 20 ‘ east at a height of about 286.6
meters from mean sea level. The sanctuary lies on Nokha-Sujangarh state highways at a
distance of 85 km. from Churu, 160 km. from Bikaner and 200 km. from Jaipur. Tal Chhapar
Sanctuary is a sanctuary located in the Churu district of north western Rajasthan in the
Shekhawati region of India. The nearest railway station is Chappar which lies on DeganaChuru-Rewari broad gauge line of north western railways. It is known for black bucks and isalso home to a variety of birds. Total area of this black buck sanctuary is of 719 hectare
which lies on both side of Chhapar-Sujangarh road. It is surrounded by Gopalpura, Tal
Chhapar (Town), Chadwas, Soorwas, Dewani, Rampura villages. The Tal Chhapar was
declared ‘Reserved Area’ for the protection of wild animals and birds in 1962. Over 2492
black bucks are found in almost tree less saline flat land of Tal Chhapar sanctuary. Tal
Chhapar was declared a “Reserved Area” for the protection of wild animals and birds in
1962.

Objective
The objective of the present study is to find out understanding and perceptions of villagers
towards wild life of black buck sanctuary.
Methodology
In order to make the study comprehensive and more analytical, both empirical and statisticalmethodologies have been applied for different aspects of the study. The present work has
been conducted with the following methods:

46

•

•

Collected primary data through sample field survey and personal observation of nearby
villages. Interview through questionnaire in which the questions were framed specially to
study the population, environment and development issues. For this 15 sample villages
have been studied.
At the micro level the study has been done on the basis of questionnaire by personal
interview method with the villager and farmers. About 25 percent of household wereinterviewed from each village. Thus 2000 respondents were interviewed in all 15 villages.

Population of Surveyed Village
The detailed survey was conducted in all 15 villages of the sanctuary area nearby village.
Total population in all 15 villages is 42946. Out of which 21824 are male and 21122 arefemale. The numbers of household are 6981 in all 15 villages. The highest populated village
is Chadwas i.e. 6945 persons. The lowest populated village is Upadhiya i.e. 389 persons.
The following table shows the population structure of surveyed villages.

#
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

Table 1: Population of Surveyed Village of Sujangarh Tehsil, 2011
Village Name
Male
Female Total Population
No. ofHouseholds
Benath Umji
369
341
710
110
Benatha Jogliya
1086
1044
2130
341
Bidas
207
194
401
65
Bothiyabas
803
876
1679
276
Chadwas
3440
3505
6945
1204
Dewani
894
957
1851
315
Dhatri
1632
1537
3169
523
Dunkar
1974
1816
3790
529
Gopalpura
3154
3002
6156
983
Jaitasar
2852
2779
5631
943
Jogliya
2688
2515
5203
798
Rampur
666
629
1295
212
Randhisar
1416
1318
2734
481
Soorwas
445
418
863
143
Upadhiya
198
191
389
58
Total
21824 21122
42946
6981

Source: Collected from Gram Panchayat Office

Literacy
As per district census 2011 the literacy level of the Sujangarh tehsil is 60.79 percent among
rural areas and 77.73 percent among in urban areas. The following table shows the detailsof the literacy level.

Area
1. Rural
2. Urban

Table 2: Literacy level in Sujangarh Tehsil - 2011 (percent)Male
Female
Total
73.91
47.07
60.79
81.58
59.42
77.73

Source: District Statistical Abstract, 2015

Socio Economic Condition
At present people living around the sanctuary mainly depend upon the agricultural, animalhusbandry and mining as major source of livelihood. Due to non-availability of agricultural
facilities and saline underground water they depend upon rains. The rains are highly erratic
and uncertain and in past the subsequent droughts have shaken their economy. The landholdings are of moderate size but less rainfall and salinity of area restrict. The land in thearea is mostly plane but not very much fertile and hence unfit for agriculture. The people
generally take one crop during rains i.e. Bajra, Moth, Moong, Guwar etc. The people keep
their uncultivated land as a grass land for their cattle. Salt is manufactured and exported
47

from salt lake. This is also source of Income for the villagers which are sending out of thearea. In addition to this edible oil is exported whereas cement is imported. The sanctuary issurrounded by Chadwas, Soorwas, Dewani, Rampura, villages among these villages Tal
Chhapar is a town having basic amenities for the population. Bajra and wheat are main
stable food.
Local Climate Suitability
The following table shows the local climate suitability for black bucks. The total numbers of
respondents were 2000 from 15 village of Sujangarh tehsil. Most of villages are situatedsurrounding the sanctuary. About 69.50 percent male and 54.70 percent female respondents
reported that local climate is suitable for black bucks. Whereas 12.90 percent male and16.40 percent female respondents reported that local climate is not suitable for black buck.
On the other hand 17.60 percent male and 28.90 percent female were reported that they
don’t know about the climate suitability for black bucks. If we go for total respondents
response it comes 62.10 percent male are positive, 14.65 percent respondents are negativeand 23.25 percent respondents don’t have any idea about the climate suitability for blackbucks. It is clear from the table that 62 percent people are aware about the climate
suitability. But 23 percent respondents were didn’t know about the climate suitability for blackbucks. Even they were not able to link between black buck and climate suitability.

Category
Yes
No
Don’t Know
Total

Table 3: Local Climate Suitability for Black Buck
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
695
547
1242
69.50
54.70
62.10
129
164
293
12.90
16.40
14.65
176
289
465
17.60
28.90
23.25
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0

Source: Based on field survey

Physiographic Suitability:
Table number 4 shows physiographic suitability for black bucks in the sanctuary. About
58.30 percent respondents reported that physiographic is suitable for black bucks in the
sanctuary area. Whereas 15.50 percent said that physiographic is not suitable for the black
buck. On the contrary 26.20 percent respondents reported they don’t know about thephysiographic suitability for black buck. Whereas if we compare male and female responses
it is noticed that female members of this area are less aware than male members.
Table 4: Tal Chhapar Physiographic Suitability for Black Buck
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
689
477
1166
68.90
47.70
58.30
No
172
138
310
17.20
13.80
15.50
Don’t Know
139
385
524
13.90
38.50
26.20
Total
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0
Category

Source: Based on field survey

People’s Awareness about notified black buck sanctuary:
Table 5 shows about people’s awareness about notified black buck sanctuary bygovernment. About 67.70 percent male and 17.80 percent female respondents were aware
about notified area of Tal Chhapar sanctuary. About 14.50 percent respondents don’t know
government notification. It is clear from the table that female members are less aware about
the government notification but male members are more aware about government
notification.

48

Table 5: People’s Awareness about notified Black Buck Sanctuary by Government
Category
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
732
622
1354
73.20
62.20
67.70
No
173
183
356
17.30
18.30
17.80
Don’t Know
95
195
290
9.50
19.50
14.50
Total
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.00100.0
Source: Based on field survey

Knowledge about types of Plants in Sanctuary Area
Table 6 reflects about the people’s knowledge regarding different kinds of plants available inthe sanctuary area. About 67.70 percent respondents reported that they are well known
about the plants available in the sanctuary area. The male and female are both very wellaware about the plants available in the sanctuary area. Whereas 23.80 percent respondents
don’t know the variety of plants available in the sanctuary area. Apart from this 8.50 percent
respondents reported that they don’t know anything about this.
Table 6: Knowledge about Types of Plants in Sanctuary Area
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
721
633
1354
72.10
63.30
67.70
No
214
262
476
21.40
26.20
23.80
Don’t Know
65
105
170
6.50
10.50
8.50
Total
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0
Category

Source: Based on field survey

Increasing Black Buck Population
Table 7 depicts about the increasing number of black bucks in the sanctuary. In this regard
the results are very specific. About 44.75 percent respondents said those populations ofblack bucks are increasing. Whereas 30.10 respondents thought that black bucks population
are not increasing. On the contrary 25.15 percent respondents have no idea about theincreasing black buck population.

Category
Yes
No
Don’t Know
Total

Table 7: Increasing Black Buck Population
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
498
397
895
49.80
39.70
44.75
364
238
602
36.40
23.80
30.10
138
365
503
13.80
36.50
25.15
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100

Source: Based on field survey

Spatial Terrain Affects the Freely Walking of Black Buck
The spatial terrain also affects the freely walking of black buck in the sanctuary area. The
following table shows the respondents related to free walking of black buck in the sanctuary.
About 28.90 percent respondents reported that the terrain of the area affects the freemovements of the black buck. Whereas 38 percent respondents reported that the terrain of
the area don’t affects the free movement of the black buck. Apart from this 33.10 percent
respondents point out that they don’t have any idea about this. It may be affected or may not
be affected the free movement of the black buck in the sanctuary area. The details are givenin the following table.
Sufficient Greenery
The greenery is basic requirement of the any wild life ecosystem. Without sufficient greenerywild life ecosystem will not survive naturally. The table number 10 shows sufficient greenery
available in the sanctuary. About 39 percent respondents reported that the greenery is
sufficient for the sanctuary’s wild life. On the other hand 40.60 percent respondents reported
49

that the greenery id not sufficient for wild life. It should be increased in a proper manner as
per local environment and need. Especially in the summer season these black buck of the
sanctuary faces many severe problems. Whereas 20.35 percent respondents said that they
don’t have any strong idea about this. They said that they don’t know anything in thisregards.
Growth and Decline of Black Buck
Population30

Knowledge about Types of Plants in
Sanctuary Area

80
70

20

-20

2014

2012

2010

2008

2006

2004

2002

-10

2000

Growth and Decline

0

Year

-30

Person Responce (%)

60
10

50
40
30
20
10
0
Male

Percentage…

FemaleTotal

Response

-40

Yes

No

Don’t Know

Table 8: Spatial Terrain Affects the Freely Walking of Black Buck
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
346
232
578
34.60.
23.20
28.90
No
368
392
760
36.80
39.20
38.00
Don’t Know
286
376
662
28.60
37.60
33.10
Total
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0
Category

Source: Based on field survey

Category
Yes
No
Don’t Know
Total

Table 9: Greenery is Sufficient for Survival of Black Buck
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
427
354
781
42.7
35.40
39.05
380
432
812
38.0
43.20
40.60
193
214
407
19.3
21.40
20.35
1000
1000
2000
1000
100.0
100.0

Source: Based on field survey

Extra Fodder during Summer Session
Table number 10 shows about the fodder facility provided by sanctuary staff. The resultshows that only 9.50 percent people are agreed that staff provide extra fodder during
summer. The result is very disappointing. Because 50.10 percent respondents reported thatthey don’t provide extra fodder during summer session. This must be checked otherwise it
will affect the wild life animal health in negative way. Apart from this 40.40 percent
respondents have no any idea whether they provide fodder in summer season because in
the summer temperature goes up to 500 C. In this time it is very hard to survive without
sufficient fodder.
Sufficient Water Facility
Table 11 shows the water facility provided by forest department during summer season.
About 32.10 percent respondents reported that sufficient water facility provided by sanctuary
staff. On the other hand 35.15 respondents reported that sufficient water facility has notbeen provided by sanctuary staff. About 32.75 percent respondents remarked that they50

don’t have any idea whether sanctuary staff provides sufficient water or not. The details are
given below.
Table10: Extra Fodder during Summer Session
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
152
38
190
15.20
3.80
9.50
472
530
1002
47.20
53.0
50.10
376
432
808
37.60
43.20
40.40
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0

Category
Yes
No
Don’t Know
Total

Source: Based on field survey

Table 11: Sufficient Water Facility Provided by Forest Department
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
389
253
642
38.9
25.30
32.10
No
312
391
703
31.2
39.10
35.15
Don’t Know
199
356
655
29.9
35.60
32.75
Total
100
1000
2000
100
100.0
100.0
Category

Source: Based on field survey
Water Facility Provided by Forest Department

Negative Impact on Agricultural Field Due toBlack Buck

45
80

35

70

30

60

Person Response (%)

Person Response (%)

40

25
20
15
10
5

40
30
20
10

0
Male
Response

50

Female

Total

0

No

Don’t Know

ResposeYes

Male

Female

Yes

No

Total
Don’t Know

Hunting Activities
The wild life hunting is completely banned in the state. Though the following table shows that
there are still some illegal hunting prevails in some areas of black buck sanctuary. Only 5.35
percent respondents reported that hunting activities are continuing in some part of the
sanctuary. Whereas 52 percent respondents reported that there is any hunting activities
carried out in the sanctuary area. It is also noticeable that 42.65 percent respondents haveno idea about hunting activities in the sanctuary area. The details are given in the following
table.
Table 12: Hunting Activities in Sanctuary Area
Category
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
085
022
107
08.50
02.20
05.35
No
529
511
1040
52.90
51.10
52.0
Don’t Know
386
467
853
38.60
46.70
42.65
Total
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0
Source: Based on field survey

51

Negative Impact on Agricultural Field
The following table shows that there are tremendous negative impacts on agricultural fields
of surrounding villages of the sanctuary. The fencing of the sanctuary area is not proper.
Due to this some black bucks go outside the boundary area and enter in agricultural fields.
About 71.20 percent respondents reported that there are negative impacts due to black buckentry in the agricultural fields. Only 9.30 percent respondents said that there are no any
negative impacts due to black bucks. About 19.50 percent respondents didn’t have any idea
whether negative or positive.
Table 13: Negative Impact on Agricultural Field due to Black Buck
Category
Response Number
Response percent
Male
FemaleTotal
Male
Female
Total
Yes
756
668
1424
75.60
66.80
71.20
No
55
131
186
5.50
13.10
9.30
Don’t Know
189
201
390
18.90
20.10
19.50
Total
1000
1000
2000
100.0
100.0
100.0
Source: Based on field survey

Eco-Development and Building Partnership with People
Tal Chhapar sanctuary is unique not only for the presence and signicant number ofBlackbuck population but from the point of cooperation of the villagers imparted for the
wellbeing of the wild life inhabiting the sanctuary. It is a well-known fact that during lean
period of summer food and water availability in the sanctuary becomes rare. This compels
the herbivores to migrate to the neighboring agriculture and private or common pasture land
belonging to the villages. The weak animals can fall an easy prey to the stray dogs. Naturally
no villagers can afford sharing the precious fodder and water resources of his cattle with wild
life, in that harsh climate condition of the Thar desert. The villagers also push away wild
animals from their field but still do not kill them. It is very important to ensure cooperation ofthese villagers for future, times as well though eco- development activities in these villages.
Therefore it is suggested that following should be taken up.
1. Entry point activities like:a. Construction of common meeting platformb. Construction of small school building or medical dispensary buildingc. Construction of panchayat bhawan
d. Construction of community water ponde. Construction of khurrahs, drainage lines etc.
f. Desalting of ponds.
2. Formation of Eco-Development committees.
3. Distribution of seedlings of fruit bearing, fodder value and shady plant to individual
farmers for planting on their personal lands.
4. Holding veterinary campus at villagers and providing medicines for vaccination
against epidemic disease.
5. Organising cinema shows on forest/wild life/ environmental subject.
6. Distribution of solar cookers. Solar lanterns/L.P.G. connections.
7. Distribution of smokeless chulhas.
8. Other low cost miscellaneous activities to generate goodwill towards the cause ofwild life conservation.
9. The Tal Chhapar Township can always play an important role in the protection anddevelopment of the sanctuary. Therefore it is proposed to build a real partnershipwith the residents of Chhapar Town. Regular meeting should be held with them toshare the problems of the reserve and thus cooperation should be seeked inshooting these problems.
Conclusion
There are number of problems identified and their suggestions are given here. A better
environment is a vital input for our growth and survival. Environmental pollution affects thequality of life and imbalance the ecology, thereby disturbing the food chain. Floods and52droughts, desertification of fertile lands, increase in the incidences of illness are some of thesymptoms of bad environment in different parts of the country. The greenhouse effect, global
warming and depletion of the ozone layer are the possible damages, likely to be caused on
the earth, due to environment pollution. If the pollution continues unchecked at this rate, atime may come when the planet may become unfit for living. The nature teaches us that theworld of living things. Plants and animals remain embedded in their environment as a very
well knit system functioning under the dictates of the laws of nature. The integrated system
is called as ecosystem but for last time man is losing the benevolence and blessing of
nature. The dawn of industrial civilization is characterized by exploitative relationship of men
with nature, resulting poverty and pollution. Since the set of Tal Chhapar Sanctuary,adequate attention minimizes or to solve the problems has not been paid. For example
proper staff to look after this sanctuary, availability of sufficient water, providing fodder,protection of the sanctuary from encroachment etc. Therefore, to solve this problem will be
discussed separately. The main problems of the sanctuary area are - At presents the
spreading up of p. Julie flora throughout the Sanctuary area is a big problem. This causes
the problem for wild animals. The specified grasses or local grasses which are primary foodfor Black buck are reducing day by day.
References
1. Aggarwal, N. (2003) Social Auditing of Environmental Laws in India, New Century
Publications Delhi.
2. Bahuguna, S. (2007) Environmental Education, Regal Publication, New Delhi.
3. Bajaj, R. (1996) CITES and the Wildlife Trade in India Centre for Environmental Law,
New Delhi, WWF, India.
4. Basu, R.C., Khan, R.A. and Alfred, J.R.B. (2006): Environmental Awareness andWildlife Conservation, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata.
5. Bhatt, S. (2004) Environment Protection and Sustainable Development, APH, New Delhi.
6. Census Handbook of Churu District (2011): Department of Census, Government of India,
New Delhi.
7. Economic Review (2010-11): Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
8. Gazetteer of Churu District (1970): Directorate of Gazetteer, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
9. Ghosh, A. (2007) Environment: Issues and Concerns, A.P.H. Pub., New Delhi.
10. Johnson, J.M. (1975) The blackbuck in Point Calimere Sanctuary, Tamilnadu its
population dynamics and observation on behaviour. Indian forester·
11. Murthy, D.B.N. (2006) Environmental Awareness and Protection: A Basic Book on
Environmental Studies, Deep and Deep Publications Private Limited, New Delhi.
12. Natarajan, V. (1991) Ecology of the blackbuck. In the final report on the ecology of Point
Calimere Wildlife and Bird Sanctuary (an endangered ecosystem);' Bombay Natural
History Society: 70-141.
13. Ojha, A. (2013) Ecology of Indian Desert Black buck Sanctuary Tal Chhapar, Lambert
Publishing Academy, Germany
14. Ojha, A. (2016) Ecological Study of Tal Chhapar Sanctuary, Churu (Rajasthan) paper
published in Journal of Global Resources, vol. 3, July 201615. Prabhakar, V.K. (2001) International Laws on Biodiversity, New Delhi, Anmol, New Delhi.
16. Prasad, S.N. (2006) Global Environment Management, Aavishkar Publishers,
Distributors Jaipur.
17. Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 (1992): Report on the UN Conference on Environmentand Development, Rio de Janeiro, UN doc. A/CONF. 151/ 26/Rev. 1 (Vol. 1-3), 3-14
June 1992.
18. Sheikh, M. M. (1992) Human Ecology of the Indian Desert: A Case Study of Churu
District (an unpublished Ph.D. thesis)
19. Statistical Abstract, District Churu (2015): Directorate of Economic and Statistical,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
20. UNCED (1992): A Guide to Agenda 21, Geneva, UNCED.
21. United Nations Development Programme (1996): Human Development Report 1996
(New York and Oxford, Oxford University Press).

53