GOVERNMENT OF ASSAMKAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKDETAILED REPORTONISSUES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONSFORLONG TERM PROTECTIONOF

THE GREATER ONE HORNEDRHINOCEROSIN

KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKPURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF

THE HON'BLE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
By

M. K. Yadava IFS
Director
Kaziranga National Park
DT. 5th August, 2014

PREAMBLE
This Detailed Report on Issues and Possible Solutions for Long Term Protection of
the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros in Kaziranga National Park has been preparedpursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court Dt. 4 Th March, 2014 in thematter of PIL 66/2012 & 67/2012, where in the Hon'ble Court directed, “Today we haveheard the views of Mr. M. K. Yadav, Director, Kaziranga National Park, who is present inperson... Mr. Yadav, Director, Kaziranga National Park, submited that sincere steps arebeing taken to curb poaching at any cost. He also submits that Government be granted
around two months time to prepare high quality methodical report to suggest various
proposals for curbing poaching on a permanent basis and also on related issues dealing
with the Park and to preserve the endangered species Rhino.... We grant two months timeto the Director, Kaziranga National Park to submit the detail report on or before the next
date of hearing suggesting therein the effective and remedial steps for implementation to
curb poaching of rhinos in the Kaziranga National Park. He is at liberty to take help of all
stakeholders, organizations, parks all over the world for preparation of report.”
In view of the above orders of the Hon'ble Court, an earnest endeavor has been made by
the Director, Kaziranga National Park to compile a detailed report on issues and possible
solutions for long term protection of rhinos in Kaziranga. Though the Report cannot betermed exhaustive by any means, it is an attempt to bring together factors that may
contribute to disappearance of Rhino from Kaziranga, and possible ways to prevent thatfrom happening. However, it must be mentioned in the beginning that without
prejudice to any other conservation site in the world, Kaziranga is a unique habitat
supporting a large number of diverse species, flora and fauna. There is no otherconservation site in the world which comes close to Kaziranga National Park interms of uniqueness and diversity. Long term preservation of this unique site has
become the biggest conservation challenge today. Poaching of the rhinoceros is only
one of the issues plaguing the Park. The other serious concerns are shrinking of thehabitat, erosion by the Brahmaputra, siltation of the water bodies, invasion of weeds andencroachment by tree forest over the grasslands, complete lack of protection of thewatershed of Kaziranga, lack of corridors around the Park, confinement of the big
mammals within the Park. Each of these issues have the potential of wiping out theresident rhinoceros population in silent ways. Almost after 110 years of start of the story ofconservation of the rhinoceros in Kaziranga, the growth in wild animal population as well
as swelling of human inhabitation have reached levels which call for exercising a very finebalance between conservation and development, making the work of conservation a lot
more difficult than it was a century ago. The question still remains to be answered
whether Kaziranga would see its bi-centenary in 2105 AD.
It is from this last point that most of the Report draws its strength from. However,
implementation of some of the suggested measures would need deeper understanding
and a close cooperation among the stakeholders. The issue of requisite financial
allocations and fund availability to implement these steps would also be a factor in
deciding whether Kaziranga would exist till 2105 AD.
Mahendra Kumar Yadava IFS
Dt. 5th August, 2014

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 2 of 402

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Kaziranga, the home of the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros, faces certain
threats which, if not adequately mitigated today, would become the cause of
extinction of the rhinoceros in times to come. The Report dwells upon thecauses and possible solutions in some details. The factors identified as
threat to the survival of the rhinos, other than poaching, are loss andfragmentation of habitat, lack to technology and strategic advantage overpoachers, certain lacuna in policy and law and their implementation,
challenges of growth and development on the fringes of the Park andpossible impacts of climate change and climate variations. The approach to
mitigate the threats and ensure long term survival of Kaziranga is multipronged and multi disciplinary with a series of immediate, short term, medium
term and long term measures to be undertaken. Some of the suggested
measures include erosion control, habitat improvement, extension of habitat,
corridors retrofitting, upscaling of anti poaching infrastructure, security andsurveillance in and around the Park, adopting a landscape based approachand constitution of a landscape authority for conservation and development of
the areas, adopting a green growth approach for development in thelandscape, adopting better management strategies such as organizational
restructuring, increased staff strength, staff welfare and creating some key
and necessary infrastructure, adopting better policies and strengthening
further the legal provisions, and above all creating several secure habitats
outside Kaziranga for the rhinos. The Report also identifies the actionables
and classifies them into immediate, short term, medium term and long term
time frames. A tentative budgetary estimate of the measures suggested isalso provided at the end along with possible sources of funding. The Reportprojects financial estimates for a period of 10 years.
The Report is divided into three parts. Part I of the Report examines the key
issues and challenges being faced in rhino protection. It also contains a brief
description of the existing set up and provides the background information
required for further analysis. Part I is divided into 9 chapters dealing with
habitat issues, human interface issues, policy and law, rhino population
dynamics, rhino poaching, stakeholders' analysis and in brief about
Kaziranga.
Part II of the Report contains the proposed solution framework and consistsof 9 chapters. The solution framework is divided into habitat strategies,
upscaling anti poaching infrastructure, Kaziranga Landscape Conservation
and Development Authority, Management strategies, Kaziranga LandscapePIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 3 of 402

Green Growth Framework, Policy, law, protocols and programme strategies,
Time budget, and lastly Budget and finances. It also contains the references,some website links and bibliography along with citations for further reading.
Part III of the Report contains the Annexures such as tables, photo-plates,
soft version minutes of various meetings held and comments and suggestions
received from various experts and stakeholders, and other annexures.
The Report finds that other than the poaching, there are other threats to thesurvival of rhino such as lack of adequate and secure habitat which is very
badly in need of extension, retrofitting of the existing corridors, introducing
SMART GUARD and SMART Communication and a series of technology
interventions in short and medium term, green growth and green
development opportunities for the fringe villages. On the policy side, it
recommends amendments in the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, changes in
the ways wildlife crime investigation is handled, organizational modifications,constitution of a Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development
Authority to manage the entire landscape as a single unit consisting of thecore, buffer and all the corridors and watersheds. The Report recommends
initiation of the Rhino Range Expansion Project, setting up of key
infrastructure and welfare of staff.
The actual implementation of the recommendations would require a series ofground surveys, in depth study, execution of Proof of Concepts, preparationof DPRs and Technical Feasibility Reports. The implementation would largely
depend upon how strong is the institutional framework, availability of funds,
support of the stakeholders, especially the local stakeholders, and themonitoring and feedback mechanisms put in place.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 4 of 402

AAU

Abbreviations and Acronyms
Assam Agricultural University

AB

Armed Branch

AC

Air Conditioning

ACF

Assistant Conservator of Forests

ACS

Assam Civil Service

Addl.

Additional

AEDA

Assam Energy Development Agency

AER

All Electric Range

AFPF

Assam Forest Protection Force

AH&V

Animal Husbandry and Veterinary

ASIF

Activity-Structure-Intensity-Fuels (Model in Transportation Sector)

AK

Automatic Kalashnikov

ANM

Auxiliary Nurse Midwife

AO

Annual Ongoing

ANPR

Automatic Number Plate Reader

APC

Anti Poaching CampAPCB

Assam Pollution Control Board

APPL

Amalgamated Plantations Private Limited

APTA

American Public Transportation Association

ARPTF

Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force

ARREP

Assam Rhino Range Expansion Project

AR&T

Administrative Reforms & Training

AsRSG

Asian Rhino Specialist GroupASI

Assistant Sub Inspector

ATM

Automated Teller Machine

ATPPF

Assam Tea Plantations Provident Fund

ATREE

Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment

ATV

All-terrain Vehicle/Advanced Tether Vehicle

AWS

Automatic Weather Station

BEL

Bharat Electronics Limited

BHEL

Bharat Heavy Electricals LimitedBP

Burapahar Range, Bullet Proof

BPL

Below Poverty LineBPO

Business Process Outsourcing

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 5 of 402

BR

Black Rhino (The African Black Rhinoceros)

BRREP

Black Rhino Range Expansion Project

B.Sc

Bachelor of Science

BSI

Botanical Survey of India

BTAD

Bodoland Territorial Area District

BWLS

Burhachapori Wildlife Sanctuary

C

Civil

CAMPA

Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority

CAG

Comptroller and Auditor General of India

CAGR

Compound Annual Growth Rate

CARE

Cooperative for American Relief Everywhere

CBI

Central Bureau of Investigation

CBO

Community Based Organization

CC

Climate Change,

CCF

Chief Conservator of Forests

CCTV

Closed Circuit Television

CD

Compact Disc

CEM

Chief Executive Member

CEO

Chief Executive Officer

CFConservator of Forests

CIRAD

Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pourle Development

CISF

Central Industrial Security ForceCITES

Convention on International Trade in endangered Species

CJ

Chief Justice

CODIS

Combined DNA Index System

CPF

Core Project FundCR

Central Range

CrPC

Code of Criminal Procedure

CS

Chief Secretary

CSA

Climate-Smart Agriculture

CSR

Corporate Social Responsibility; Central Strong Room

CSV

Comma Separated Value

CTMR

Camera Trap Mark Recapture

CT ScanComputed Tomography ScanPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 6 of 402

CWLW

Chief Wildlife Warden

CWRC

Center for Wildlife Rehabilitation and Conservation

CZA

Central Zoo Authority

DAkkS

Deutsche Akkreditierungsstelle GmbH

DBBL

Double Barrel Gun

DC

Deputy Commissioner

DCF

Deputy Conservator of Forests

DCRF

District Council Reserve Forest

DDO

Drawing & Disbursing Officer

DFID

Department for International Development

DFMD

Door Frame Metal Detector

DFO

Divisional Forest Officer

DGP

Director General of Police

DIG

Deputy Inspector General

DLR

German Aerospace Center, Deutsches Zentrum Luft Raumfahrt

DNA

Deoxyribonucleic Acid

DPR

Detailed Project Report

DSMD

Deep Search Metal Detector

DSWF

David Shepherd Wildlife Foundation

DTH

Direct To Home

DTP

Desk Top Publishing

Dy.

DeputyEAWL

Eastern Assam Wildlife

ECC

Ecological Carrying Capacity

ECP

Erosion Control Programme

ECS

Electronics Clearance Service

EDC

Eco Development Committee

EDP

Electronic Data Processing

EE

Electronic Eye, Executive Engineer

ER

Eastern Range; Elephant Reserve

ESZ

Eco Sensitive Zone

EU

European Union

EV

Electric Vehicle

E-W

East-WestPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 7 of 402

FAR

Floor Area Ratio (Floor Area Index)

FBI

Federal Bureau of Investigation

FD

Field Director, Forest Department

FDA

Forest Development Agency

Fgd

Forest Guard

FIRFirst Information Report

FLIR

FLIR Systems Inc.

FOCD

Forest Offence Case Diary

FOSS

Free and Open Source Software

FR

Forest Ranger

FREMAA

Flood & Riverbank Erosion Management Agency of Assam

Frl

Forester Grade I

FRP

Fibre Reinforced Plastic

FVO

Field Veterinary Officerg/HP-hrGram per horse-power hourGAIL

Gas Authority of India Ltd.

GARIIASI

GIS and Remote Sensing Integrated Initiative for Administrative andSocial Infrastructure

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

GHG

Green House Gases

GHP

Good Hygiene Practices

GIS

Geographic Information System

GMP

Good Manufacturing Practices

GOH(The) Greater One Horned (Rhinoceros)

GoPro

GoPro Inc.

GP

Gram Panchayat

GPS

Global Positioning System

GRIHA

Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment

GRP

Government Railway Police

GSI

Geological Survey of India

GSM

Groupe Spécial Mobile, Global System for Mobile

GSR

Ground Surveillance Radar

Ha

HectareHELP

Human Elephant Learning Programme

HEP

Habitat Extension Program

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 8 of 402

HHMD

Hand held Metal Detector

HIP

Habitat Improvement Programme

HIV/AIDS

Human Immunodeficiency Virus / Acquired Immuno Deficiency
Syndrome

HoFF

Head of Forest ForceHP

Hindustan Petroleum

HR

Human Resource

HSD

High Speed Diesel

HSLC

High School Leaving Certificate

HSSLC

High Secondary School Leaving Certificate

HQ

Head Quarter

iMiEV

i-Mitsubishi Innovative Electric Vehicle

IAS

Indian Administrative Service

IB

Inspection Bungalow, Intelligence Bureau

IBA

Important Bird Area

ICCTInternational Council on Clean Transportation

ICDP

Integrated Conservation and Development Project

ID

Identity

IEC

Information, Education and Communication

IFAW

International Fund for Animal Welfare

IFOAM

International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements

IFS

Indian Forest Service

IG

Inspector General

IGF

Inspector General of Forests,

IIITA

Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad

IIT

Indian Institute of Technology

IM

Immediate

IMR

Infant Mortality Rate

IMAX 3D

Image MAXimum 3 Dimensional

INDOCERT

Indian Organic Certification Agency

INR

Indian Rupee

IOC

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd

IPC

Indian Penal Code

IPCC

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IPS

Indian Police Service

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 9 of 402

IR

Indian Rhino; Infra-Red

IRC

Indian Rhino Congress

IRF

International Rhino Foundation

IRV

Indian Rhino VisionIS

Indian Standards, Immediate to Short Term

IT

Information Technology

ITSIntelligent Traffic System

IUCN

International Union for Conservation of Nature

JNNURM

Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission

K

Kilo, 103

KA

Karbi Anglong

KAADC

Karbi Anglong Autonomous District Council

KBCDC

Kaziranga Bio-Diversity Conservation and Development Committee

KCCC

Kaziranga Centenary Convention Center

KEZ

Kaziranga Eco-Sensitive Zone

KLCDA

Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority

KLGGF

Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework

KM

Kilo Meter

KMDC

Kaziranga Mini Data Center

KNP

Kaziranga National ParkKNPSWS

Kaziranga National Park Staff Welfare Society

KPLT

Karbi People's Liberation Tiger

KR

Kaziranga Range

KTCF

Kaziranga Tiger Conservation Foundation

KTR

Kaziranga Tiger Reserve

L1

Level 1LAC

Local Advisory Committee

LCA

Life Cycle Assessment

LEED

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

LED

Light Emitting Diode

LPG

Liquefied Petroleum Gas

LPS

Local Protection Squads

LTLong Term

LWLS

Laokhowa Wildlife Sanctuary

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 10 of 402

MMillion, Mega, 106

Mbps

Mega bits per second

MDC

Mini Data Center

MDG

Millennium Development Goals

MISManagement Information System

ML

Medium Term to Long Term

MLA

Member of Legislative Assembly

MoD

Ministry of Defence

MoEF

Ministry of Environment and Forests

MMR

Maternal Mortality Ratio

MNRE

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy

MSME

Ministry of Small and Medium Enterprises

MT

Metric Tonnes; Medium Term

MVS

Mobile Veterinary Service

MW

Mega WattMySQL

My Structured Query Language

NAB

National Accreditation Body

NABCB

National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies

NABET

National Accreditation Board for Education and Training

NDFB

National Democratic Front of Bodoland

NDZ

No Development Zone

NE

North East

NEHU

North East Hill University

NEIST

North East Institute of Science and Technology

NER

North Eastern Region

NERIWALM

North East Regional Institute of Water and Land Management

NESAC

North East Space Application Centre

NGO

Non-Governmental Organisation

NGT

National Green Tribunal

NH

National Highway

NHAI

National Highway Authority of India

NHPC

National Hydro Power Corporation Ltd.

NOCNo Object Certificate

NP

National ParkPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 11 of 402

NR

Northern Range

NRHM

National Rural Health Mission

NTCA

National Tiger Conservation Authority

NTFP

Non Timber Forest Produce

NTPC

National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd.

NPOP

National Programme for Organic Production

NRL

Numaligarh Refinery Ltd.

NRLM

National Rural Livelihood Mission

NVD

Night Vision Device

NVEQF

National Vocational Education Qualification Framework

NVQF

National Vocational Qualification Framework

NWDFDA

Nagaon Wildlife Divisional Forest Development Agency

OA

Original Application

OGS

Organic Guarantee SystemOIL

Oil India Limited

ONGC

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd

OSU

Ohio State University

OCV

OTG Communities and Villages

OTG

Off-The-Grid

PA

Protected Area

PAN

Protected Area Network

PCCF

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

P&D

Planning and Development

PDR

Pulse Doppler RadarPF

Provident Fund

PGCIL

Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

PIL

Public Interest Litigation

PGR

Public Grazing Reserve

PIR

Passive Infra Red

PMGSY

Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojna

PMU

Project Monitoring Unit

PO

Place of Occurrence

PoC

Proof of Concept

ppm

parts per million

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 12 of 402

PPP

Public Private Partnership

P&RD

Panchayat & Rural Development

PRA

Participatory Rural Appraisal

PRF

Proposed Reserve Forest

PS

Police Station

PSU

Public Sector Undertaking

PTZ

Pan, Tilt, Zoom

PV

Photo Voltaic

PVR

Priya Village Roadshow

PWD

Public Works Department

QCI

Quality Council of India

RCC

Reinforced Cement Concrete

RCP

Representative Concentration Pathway

R&D

Research & Development

REWP

Research, Education and Working Plan

RF

Reserve Forest

RFRI

Rain Forest Research Institute

RhoDIS

Rhino DNA Index System

RPF

Railway Protection Force

Rs.

(INdian) Rupees

RWH

Rain Water Harvesting

SAIL

Steel Authority of India Ltd.

SBBL

Single Barrel Gun

SCN

Sensor Communication Networks

SDC

State Data CenterSDO

Sub Divisional Officer

SEM

Scanning Electron Microscope

SFM

Sustainable Forest Management

SHG

Self Help GroupSL

Short term to Long Term

SLF

Sustainable Livelihood Framework

SLR

Self Loading Rifle, Self Lens Reflex

SM

Short Term to Medium Term

SMART

Sustain Stamina, Motivated, Action Oriented, Ready to Act, Trained andTactically Superior; Swift, Meaningful, always On, Reach All, Trouble

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 13 of 402

Free; Specific, Measurable, Assignable, Realistic, Time related
SMS

Short Message Service

SOP

Standard Operating Procedures

SP

Superintendent of Police

ST

Short Term

S&T

Science & Technology

STF

Special Task Force

SUVSport Utility Vehicle

SWAN

State Wide Area Network

SWOT

Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats

TCP

Tiger Conservation PlanTE

Tea Estate

TERI

The Energy and Resource Institute

TFR

Technical Feasibility Report

TOD

Transit Oriented Development

TRAFFIC[Trade Records Analysis of Flora and Fauna in Commerce] Traffic
International

UAV

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

UBI

Unconditional Basic Income

UCF

UBI Corpus Fund

UCS

Union of Concerned Scientists

UN

United Nations

UNEP

United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

USDA

United States Department of Agriculture

USFWS

United States Fish & Wildlife Service

USDE

United States Department of Energy

VDP

Village Defence Party

VGL

Veterinary Genetics Laboratory

VGR

Village Grazing Reserve

W

Watt

WAWL

Western Assam Wildlife

WCCB

Wildlife Crime Control Bureau

WCIO

Wildlife Crime Investigation Officer

WCT

Wildlife Conservation Trust

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 14 of 402

Wi-fi

Wireless Fidelity

WII

Wildlife Institute of India

WL

Wildlife

WLRO

Wildlife Research Officer

WLS

Wildlife Sanctuary

Wi-MaxWorldwide Interoperability Microwave Access

WPA

Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972

WP(C)Writ Petition (Civil)

WPT&BC

Welfare Plains Tribes and Backward Classes

WR

Western Range

WR

White Rhino (The African White or Squaretipped Rhinoceros)

WTI

Wildlife Trust of India

WQ

Water Quality

WWF

World Wildlife Fund, World Wide Fund for Nature

WWT

Wildlife Areas Development and Welfare Trust

YOE

Year of Establishment

YTD

Young Tea DosePIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 15 of 402

Table of Contents
1 Background, Methodology and Approach........................................................................24
1.1 Judicial Activism and Kaziranga................................................................................24
1.1.1 Other Cases in the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court on Kaziranga.............24
1.1.2 National Green Tribunal.........................................................................25
1.1.3No Development Zone............................................................................29
1.2 Order Dt. 12Th June, 2014 in the PIL 66/2012...........................................................30
1.3Order Dt. 4Th March, 2013..........................................................................................30
1.4Methodology...............................................................................................................31
1.4.1 Stakeholders Meetings..........................................................................31
1.4.2 International Conclave on Kaziranga....................................................32
1.4.3 Preparation of Approach Paper on Kaziranga.......................................32
1.4.4 Panel of Experts....................................................................................32
1.4.5 Original Survey and Data Collection.....................................................32
1.4.6 Final Review..........................................................................................33
1.5 Acknowledgment........................................................................................................33
2 HABITAT ISSUES.............................................................................................................46
2.1 Loss of Habitat: Flood and Erosion...........................................................................46
2.2 Habitat Fragmentation...............................................................................................48
2.2.1 NH 37 in Today's Perspective................................................................49
2.2.2 National Green Tribunal and NH37.......................................................49
2.2.3 Fragmentation of Corridors...................................................................53
2.2.4 Barrier Effect..........................................................................................55
2.3 Satellite Imagery Evidence of the Corridor Fragmentation...........................................
.........................................................................................................................................55
2.3.1 Conservation vs Development Paradox................................................56
2.4 Degradation of Habitat...............................................................................................59
2.4.1 Invasive Weeds:....................................................................................59
2.4.2 Siltation of the Water Bodies.................................................................60
2.4.3 Shrinking of Grasslands........................................................................60
2.4.4 Overgrazing...........................................................................................60
2.4.5 Water Scarcity.......................................................................................61
2.5 Migration of Wild Animals..........................................................................................61
2.6 Conclusions...............................................................................................................61
3 The Existing Protection Framework of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve....................................63
3.1 The Sentinels of Kaziranga........................................................................................63
3.1.1 Staff Strength.........................................................................................64
3.1.2 The Assam Forest Protection Force......................................................65
3.1.3 Home Guards........................................................................................66
3.1.4 Participatory Protection.........................................................................66
3.1.5 Present Administrative Set Up and Anti Poaching Infrastructure..........66
3.1.6 Roads and Bridges................................................................................68
3.1.7 Wireless Communication System..........................................................69
3.1.8 Weaponry..............................................................................................69
3.1.9 Other Anti Poaching Infrastructure, Gears and Logistics......................70
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 16 of 402

3.1.10 Departmental Elephants......................................................................71
3.1.11 Staff Welfare........................................................................................72
3.1.12 The Role of AFPF HQ:.........................................................................72
3.2 Nagaon Wildlife Division............................................................................................72
3.2.1 Manpower..............................................................................................73
3.2.2 Present Administrative Set Up and Anti Poaching Infrastructure..........75
3.2.3 Other Anti Poaching Infrastructure, Gears and Logistics......................76
3.2.4 Staff Welfare:.........................................................................................77
3.3 Other Stakeholding Managers...................................................................................77
3.4 Conclusion.................................................................................................................77
4 People and Development Issues......................................................................................79
4.1 People on the Fringe of Kaziranga............................................................................79
4.1.1 Eco-Development Committees (EDCs).................................................79
4.2 EDC Fact Sheets.......................................................................................................83
4.2.1 Demographics........................................................................................83
4.2.2 Land and land Holdings.........................................................................83
4.2.3 Livelihood Options.................................................................................83
4.2.4 Livestock................................................................................................83
4.2.5 Housing, Electricity, Water and Energy.................................................83
4.2.6 Man Animal Interactions........................................................................84
4.3 Challenges Faced by the Fringe Village Communities.............................................84
4.4Tourism.......................................................................................................................84
4.4.1 Jeep Safari:............................................................................................85
4.5 Human Animal Interface............................................................................................85
4.6 Conclusions...............................................................................................................86
5 Policy and Law Issues......................................................................................................87
5.1 State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972...........................................87
5.2Immunity to Forest Staff in Using Fire Arms...............................................................87
5.3 Provisions of the Sarai Act, 1867...............................................................................88
5.4 Wildlife Crime and Prosecution.................................................................................88
5.5 Intelligence and Trans-Boundary Issues...................................................................89
5.6Permissions for UAV Flying........................................................................................90
5.7 Funding Issues..........................................................................................................90
5.8 Existing Institutional Mechanisms in Kaziranga........................................................91
5.8.1 Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP):............................................................91
5.8.2 ECO SENSITIVE ZONE:.......................................................................91
5.8.3 Kaziranga Bio-Diversity Conservation And Development Committee. .93
5.8.4 Local Advisory Committee.....................................................................96
5.8.5Committee on De-horning of Rhinos in Assam......................................97
5.8.6 Committee for Preparation of Comprehensive Rhino Conservation Plan
for Assam........................................................................................................97
5.8.7 Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force (ARPTF)............................................98
5.9 Wildlife laws in International Perspective..................................................................98
5.9.1 Nepal Enactment on Wildlife Conservation...........................................98
5.9.2 South Africa/ Kenya Enactments on Wildlife Conservation...................99
5.10 Crime and Punishment..........................................................................................100
5.10.1 Bail.....................................................................................................101
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 17 of 402

5.10.2 Life Imprisonment..............................................................................103
5.10.3 Environment, Forestry Wildlife Rights...............................................104
5.11 Rhino Protocols......................................................................................................105
5.12 Conclusions...........................................................................................................105
6 Rhino Population Dynamics...........................................................................................106
6.1 About Rhinoceros In Brief........................................................................................106
6.1.1World Population Of Rhinoceros..........................................................108
6.2 Rhino Population of Kaziranga................................................................................1086.2.1Rhino Census Productivity Levels in Kaziranga...................................114
6.2.2 Modeling the Rhino Census Population in Kaziranga.........................118
6.3 Conclusion...............................................................................................................124
7 RHINO POACHING........................................................................................................125
7.1 The Rhinoceros Horn...............................................................................................125
7.2 International Scenario On Rhino Poaching.............................................................126
7.3 Rhino Poaching In Kaziranga..................................................................................127
7.3.1 Analysis of the Poaching Statistics......................................................130
7.3.2Anti-Poaching Statistics........................................................................136
Use of Dog Squad:........................................................................................................138
7.3.3 Possible Reasons for Increase in Poaching in Kaziranga..................139
7.3.4 International Perspective on Poaching................................................140
7.3.5 Anti Poaching Measures Taken So Far...............................................140
7.4 Conclusions.............................................................................................................141
8Stakeholders' Analysis and Responsibilities...................................................................142
9 ABOUT KAZIRANGA......................................................................................................144
9.1 INTRODUCTION:....................................................................................................144
9.2GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION & CONSERVATION PROVINCES:..............................144
9.3 WORLD HERITAGE SITE:......................................................................................144
9.4 IMPORTANT DATES & MILESTONES...................................................................145
9.5 FLORA & FAUNA:....................................................................................................146
9.5.1 AVIFAUNA :..........................................................................................146
9.6 WILD ANIMAL CENSUS AND POPULATION:........................................................147
9.7ADDITIONS TO THE KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARK:............................................147
9.8Kaziranga Forest Types & Habitat............................................................................148
10 THE PROPOSED SOLUTION FRAMEWORK.............................................................150
11 Habitat Strategies.........................................................................................................152
11.1 Erosion Control Programme (ECP).......................................................................152
11.1.1 Flood – A Boon for Kaziranga............................................................153
11.1.2 Staggered Inflow and Outflow of Flood Waters.................................154
11.1.3 Proposed Erosion Control Measures.................................................154
11.2 Habitat Improvement Programme (HIP)................................................................155
11.3 Extension of Habitat...............................................................................................158
11.3.1 Recommendations of the AsRSG of IUCN........................................159
11.3.2 Possible Extension Areas..................................................................160
11.4 Corridor Retrofitting Strategies..............................................................................160
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 18 of 402

11.4.1 Corridor Retrofitting on NH37............................................................161
11.4.2 Other Corridors..................................................................................161
11.4.3 Functional Corridors..........................................................................162
11.4.4 No Activity Buffer Zone......................................................................162
11.5 Eviction of Encroachments....................................................................................163
11.6 New Corridors........................................................................................................167
11.7 Informed Management...........................................................................................168
12 UPSCALING ANTI POACHING INFRASTRUCTURE.................................................169
12.1 Mission Poaching Free Kaziranga.........................................................................169
12.1.1 Goals of the Mission..........................................................................170
12.1.2 Objectives of the Mission..................................................................170
12.1.3 Expected Outcomes of the Mission...................................................170
12.2 Key Components of the Mission............................................................................170
12.2.1 Introducing SMART GUARD:............................................................172
12.2.2 Smart Communication.......................................................................173
12.2.3 Electronic Eye....................................................................................174
12.2.4 R&D Efforts in Anti-poaching and Surveillance.................................174
12.2.5 Stealth Vehicles and Boats................................................................175
12.2.6 Perimeter Security and Virtual Fencing.............................................175
12.2.7 UAV and Air Surveillance...................................................................177
12.2.8 Informed Management Systems.......................................................181
AWS & Water Quality Monitoring.....................................................................181
GIS...................................................................................................................181
Information Technology and Big Data...............................................................182
12.3 Solar Power...........................................................................................................183
12.4Tazer Gun and Other Technologies........................................................................183
13 The Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority............................184
13.1 Naming the Authority.............................................................................................18513.2 Landscape Approach.............................................................................................186
13.2.1 Watershed of Kaziranga....................................................................186
13.2.2 Tea Gardens around Kaziranga........................................................192
13.2.3 Brahmaputra River and Chapories....................................................199
13.2.4 Corridors............................................................................................201
13.2.5 Animal Migration in the Landscape...................................................201
13.3 The KLCDA Framework.........................................................................................201
13.3.1 Aims and Objects...............................................................................202
13.3.2 Governance Structure.......................................................................202
13.3.3 Executive Structure...........................................................................20413.3.4 Funding..............................................................................................20413.3.5 Powers and Functions.......................................................................20413.4 Constituents of the Proposed Kaziranga Landscape............................................205
13.5Proposed Master Plan and Zonation Outline.........................................................205
13.5.1 Land Use Classification.....................................................................206
13.5.2 Building Regulation............................................................................206
13.6Possible Activities to be funded by the Authority....................................................206
14 Management Strategies...............................................................................................208
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 19 of 402

14.1 Organizational Restructuring.................................................................................208
14.1.1 Proposed Staff Strength....................................................................212
14.1.2 Reorganization of EAWL...................................................................213
14.1.3 Vacancies in AFPF............................................................................215
14.2 Realignment of Anti Poaching Camps...................................................................215
14.2.1 Additional Role & Responsibilities of Range HQ and Beats.............217
14.2.2 Additional Incentives to Personnel Posted in Wildlife Areas.............217
14.2.3 Family Welfare Measures..................................................................218
14.2.4 Vehicles.............................................................................................218
14.2.5 River Patrol........................................................................................218
14.2.6 Dog Squad.........................................................................................219
14.3 Roads and Bridges................................................................................................219
14.4 Key Infrastructure..................................................................................................220
15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework........................................................225
15.1 What This Framework is Not About?.....................................................................226
15.2 The Basic Principles of the Green Growth Framework.........................................227
15.2.1 Respect and Admiration for Wildlife..................................................228
15.2.2 Green Economy.................................................................................229
15.2.3 Green Politics is Here to Stay...........................................................230
15.2.4 The Alaska Dividend..........................................................................230
15.3 Permaculture Principles.........................................................................................230
15.3.1 Permaculture Design Principles........................................................230
15.3.2 Six Natural Principles of Birch...........................................................231
15.3.3 Permaculture Design Principles of Mollison......................................231
15.3.4 Permaculture Design Features..........................................................232
15.3.5 Permaculture Zonations....................................................................232
15.3.6 Industrial Culture vs Sustainable Culture..........................................233
15.3.7 Fryers Forest Eco Village..................................................................234
15.4 The Natural Step....................................................................................................234
15.5 Low Carbon Development.....................................................................................234
15.5.1 Climate Change and Human Society................................................235
15.5.2 Is Being Green Anti Development?...................................................235
15.6 Renewable Energy................................................................................................237
15.7 Climate Smart Agriculture......................................................................................238
15.7.1 Organic Agriculture............................................................................239
15.7.2 Organic Certification..........................................................................240
15.7.3 Organic Agriculture: North-east India and Assam.............................241
15.8 Low Impact Buildings.............................................................................................242
15.8.1 Embodied Energy Analysis................................................................243
15.8.2 LEED Certification.............................................................................243
15.8.3 GRIHA...............................................................................................243
15.8.4 Net Zero Building...............................................................................243
15.8.5 Off-the-Grid Housing.........................................................................244
15.8.6 Model Villages...................................................................................244
15.8.7 Grey Water........................................................................................245
15.8.8 Rain Water Harvesting......................................................................245
15.8.9 Waste Management..........................................................................246
15.8.10 FAR or Building Carbon Footprint?.................................................246
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 20 of 402

15.9 Green Transportation.............................................................................................247
15.9.1 Actual Fuel Cost................................................................................248
15.9.2 Safe Walkways..................................................................................249
15.9.3 Safe Cycling......................................................................................249
15.9.4 Public Transport.................................................................................250
15.9.5 Electric Truck.....................................................................................251
15.9.6 Electric Bus........................................................................................251
15.9.7 Electric Vehicles................................................................................252
15.9.8 Transit Oriented Development (ToD).................................................254
15.9.9 Better Roads......................................................................................254
15.10 People's Framework............................................................................................254
15.10.1 Millennium Development Goals (MDG)...........................................255
15.10.2 Building Green and Resilient Communities.....................................25615.10.3 Sustainable Livelihood Framework.................................................257
15.10.4 Social and Financial Inclusion.........................................................258
15.10.5 Alternate Livelihoods.......................................................................260
15.10.6 Gender Mainstreaming and Women's Empowerment....................261
15.11 Man Animal Interface Management.....................................................................261
15.12 People's Participation Framework.......................................................................262
15.12.1People's Participation Models..........................................................262
15.12.2Companion Modeling Approach.......................................................263
15.12.3 Micro Plans......................................................................................26415.12.4 Capacity Building and IEC...............................................................265
16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies......................................................266
16.1 Proposed State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.......................266
16.1.1 Proposed Amendment under Chapter VI..........................................267
16.1.2 Proposed Amendment under Chapter VIA........................................267
16.2 Applying Provisions of Sarai Act, 1867..................................................................268
16.3 Wildlife Crime and Prosecution.............................................................................268
16.3.1 Removal of Legal Bottlenecks...........................................................268
16.3.2 Removal of Procedural and Administrative Bottlenecks...................270
16.3.3 Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation Methodology..............................273
16.3.4 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigations.............................276
16.3.5 Implementing RhoDIS.......................................................................277
16.3.6 Inter Agency Coordination.................................................................278
16.3.7 Protocol and Training for Enforcement Agencies..............................281
16.3.8 Access to Mobile Subscribers' Data..................................................282
16.4 Research and Development..................................................................................282
16.5 Institutional Mechanisms in Kaziranga..................................................................282
16.5.1 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority.....283
16.5.2 KLCDA Policy Framework.................................................................283
16.5.3 Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve Management...............284
16.5.4 Management of Areas outside the KTR............................................284
16.5.5 Tiger Conservation Plan....................................................................285
16.5.6 Kaziranga Biodiversity Conservation and Development Committee 286
16.5.7 Local Advisory Committee.................................................................286
16.6 Rhino Protocols.....................................................................................................286
16.7 Tourism..................................................................................................................288
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 21 of 402

16.8 Training, Capacity Building and Manpower Support.............................................292
16.9 Raising of Additional AFPF Battalions...................................................................292
16.10 Assam Rhino Range Expansion Project (ARREP)..............................................29316.10.1 Black Rhino Expansion Project.......................................................29316.10.2 IRV 2020..........................................................................................29316.10.3 Aim of the Project............................................................................296
16.10.4 Status of IRV2020 in ARREP..........................................................296
16.10.5 Institutional Mechanism of ARREP.................................................296
16.10.6 Plans and Activities..........................................................................297
16.10.7 Areas to be covered.........................................................................297
16.10.8 The ECC of the Habitats and Challenges in Rhino Bearing Areas. 297
17 Time Budget.................................................................................................................302
17.1 Immediate Measures.............................................................................................303
17.1.1 Immediate to Short Term...................................................................304
17.2 Short Term Measures............................................................................................304
17.2.1 Short Term to Medium Term Measures.............................................306
17.2.2 Short Term to Long Term Measures..................................................307
17.3 Medium Term Measures........................................................................................307
17.3.1 Medium Term to Long Term Measures..............................................308
17.4 Long Term Measures.............................................................................................308
17.5 All Measures at a Glance.......................................................................................309
18 Budget and Finance......................................................................................................314
18.1 Budget Estimates...................................................................................................314
18.2 Funding Sources....................................................................................................315
18.2.1 Core Project Fund (CPF)...................................................................315
18.2.2 Project Funding.................................................................................316
18.2.3 Non Plan Support..............................................................................316
18.2.4 State Plan Support............................................................................316
18.3 Revenues and Income...........................................................................................317

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 22 of 402

GOVERNMENT OF ASSAMKAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKDETAILED REPORTONISSUES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONSFORLONG TERM PROTECTIONOF

THE GREATER ONE HORNEDRHINOCEROSIN

KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKPURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF

THE HON'BLE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

PART IPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 23 of 402

CHAPTER 1
1

Background, Methodology and Approach

The present matter arose because of a suo moto PIL registered by the Hon'ble GauhatiHigh Court PIL No. 66/2012 which was registered at the very direction of the Hon'ble Chief
Justice when the news paper reports and media contained too many reports on killings ofthe rhino in Kaziranga. Later on there were several other cases that were coupled with it,
and joint hearing of all the cases started taking place. In course of the hearings, theDirector Kaziranga National Park was called for a personal hearing and directed to tocompile a report on the protection of the rhinos and issues faced by it. This order was
issued on the 4th March, 2014. This is the genesis of the Report. The Hon'ble Gauhati High
Court vide the order dt. 12 th June, 2014 have directed the report to be submitted to the
Hon'ble Court on the 5th of August, 2014 along with the views of the Government.
1.1

Judicial Activism and Kaziranga

There are several cases running in the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court such as the PIL
66/2012, PIL 67/2012, the PIL 6/2008.
The PIL 6/2008 was filed by the public charitable trust Human Elephant Learning
Programme (HELP) that due to the apathy of the State Forest Department there had beena gradual aggravation of the natural habitat of the wild elephants. This has resulted infrequent human-elephant conflicts. The herds of wild elephants are frequently intruding
into the human habitations causing massive damages to property and incidents of killinghuman beings are also taking place frequently in the State.
The PIL 67/2012 was filed by one Sri Mrinal Saikia regarding encroachment in Kaziranga
National Park on 8th October, 2013. The matter was heard along with 66/2012 and on the
8th Januray, 2013, the following orders were issued, “Learned Additional Advocate Generalfor the State of Assam states that within the Kaziranga National Park there is no
encroachment and efforts are being made to remove the encroachment from the area
outside the Park which is proposed to be handed over to the National Park. Steps forremoving encroachment may be completed as far as possible within three months fromtoday so that such land can be handed over to the Kaziranga National Park. Affidavit of thesteps taken in this regard be filed before the next date. The State may also take the helpof such NGOs as may be found useful for the purpose. List again on 10.04.2013, as
prayed.”1.1.1

Other Cases in the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court on Kaziranga

There is a case No. WP(C) 1186/2008 Tanka Lal Das and Others vs. State of Assamwhich has been filed by the petitioner being agrieved of the previous order of the Hon'ble
Gauhati High Court. It is the order of the Hon’ble Court in the mater of M/S Chandmari Tea
Company Limited –vs- State of Assam and others as appeared in 2003(2) GLT232 is anamalgamaion of the mater arising out of the judgment dated, 11.09.2002 by Division Bench of
the Hon’ble Court in Writ Appeal No. 269 of 1999 and other connected cases. The said order was
issued by the Hon’ble Court on 22.11.2002 in the mater of M/s Chandmari Tea Company Limited –vs-State of Assam and others Comprising of Civil Rule No. 923 of 1993, 3683 of 1994, 3685 of 1994,
3845 of 1994, 4167 of 1996 and 2397 of 1998. The Hon’ble Court directed, “----- the mater will
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 24 of 402

now have to go back to the authority for a de-novo determinaion.” Accordingly pursuant to orderof the Hon’ble Court, Government of Assam in the Department of Environment & Forest vide order
No. FRS.89/2002/13 dated 22.12.2008 appointed Sri H.M. Cairare, IAS the then Principal Secretary
to the Govt. of Assam, Public Enterprise Department, Dispur as Collector to enquire into anddetermine the existence, the nature and extent of any rights/claims alleged to exist in favour of any
person or persons in on over any land in the Proposed in 6 th Addiion to Kaziranga Naional Park as
per procedure laid down in secion 19 to 26 A (both exclusive except (C) of sub-secion (2) ofsecion 24) of the Wildlife (Protecion) Act, 1972, read with secion 35 of the said Act. Accordingly,
The Collector duly enquired into and determined the existence, the nature and extent of any
rights/claims alleged to exist in favour of the peiioners along with other persons, in or over any
land within the limit of the proposed 6 th Addiion to Kaziranga Naional Park and disposed of thesame as “Claim for Land Rejected and Addiional Claim based on Catle Grazing also Rejected”
which form Annexure- IX of the Report of the Collector. It may seen in the said Annexure that nameof the peiioners i.e. Tanka Lal Das of Talengania appears at Serial No. 7 having case No. KNP
VI/633/2009. Therefore, the peiioner does not have any rights and claims over any land within
the limit of the proposed 6 th Addiion to Kaziranga Naional Park as determined by the Collector
duly appointed under law pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble Court dated, 22.11.2002 in themater of M/s Chandmari Tea Company Limited –vs- State of Assam and others. The Claim of thepeiioners along with all other person whose rights/claims, if any, have already been exinguishedby the Collector duly appointed under Law adhering to all the procedural safe guard, prescribedunder secion 19 to 26 of the Wildlife (Protecion) Act. 1972. Therefore the peiion must be
rejected forthwith for larger public interest of consituion of the 6 th Addiion to Kaziranga Naional
Park and other pending addiions to Kaziranga Naional Park.
1.1.2

National Green Tribunal

Similarly, several cases / PIL have been filed in the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal aswell. Noted among them are the M.A, No. 687 of 2013, M. A. No. 1070 of 2013 and M.A.
No. 142 of 2014 in O.A. No. 174 of 2013, and Application No. 38/2011 in Rohit Choudhury
Vs Union of India. A series of orders have been passed in OA No. 38/2011 by the Hon'ble
National Green Tribunal concerning Kaziranga where setting up of industries/ polluting
units such as brick kilns, stone crusher units, tea factories etc. have been either banned or
allowed to operate under certain conditions within the NDZ. The cases also concern the
National Highway 37. The orders of the Hon'ble Tribunal in both the matters are briefly
touched upon in the following paragraphs. A small write up on NDZ is also provided
thereafter to put everything in perspective. The orders are very exhaustive, and it may not
be advisable to quote the orders in entirety. The readers are requested to visit the websiteof the Hon'ble Tribunal http://www.greentribunal.gov.in for more details.

Orders under the OA 38/2011:
In the order Dt. 15Th February, 2012, the Honble Tribunal said, “... As an interim
measure, we direct the Authorities to maintain status-quo till the next date andnot to grant permission for any new crusher unit or any other new industrial
unit in the demarcated zone. The Authorities shall also not renew thepermission granted to Stone Crusher Units or any other unit which arefunctioning in the vicinity of Kaziranga National Park till the next date.”
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 25 of 402

In the order Dt. 23Rd May, 2012, the Hon'ble Tribunal opined, “... it is stated asfollows: A total of 64 units, i.e. stone crushers - 26, Brick Kilns - 14, Tea Estates- 12, Miscellaneous units - 12 are existing in this NDZ under reference. A prayer
is also made to grant further time for carrying out detailed inspection and to
submit a inal report by MoEF. .. By Interim order, we had directed all theconcerned to maintain status quo with regard to the aforesaid Zone. The saidorder was clariied by order dated 21 st March, 2012. After going through the
aidavit, iled by MoEF, wherein it has been clearly stated that 64 units areexisting in the NDZ as on date, have no hesitation to direct the Authorities totake necessary action with regard to the functioning of the aforesaid units.
However, with regard to the 12 Tea Estates, it is made clear that if there is noprocessing units or boilers existing, they should be left for the time being. It isfurther made clear that this order is only for the interregnum period, liberty is
granted to all the Respondents / unit holder to ile detail counters and pray formodiication of the order if exigency arises. MoEF is also directed to ile a
detailed counter aidavit enclosing the report and all relevant documents andalso furnish the names of the units which are operating/existing within the
NDZ. MoEF is also further directed to furnish all the names of the units which
are operating or within 500 mt. outer periphery of NDZ or are existing in thevicinity, along with the reports as to whether they are complying with thestipulated environmental standards or have louted any condition imposed onthem for safeguard of the environment. The report shall be iled alongwith therelevant documents within 2 months from today. The MoEF is also directed tofurnish a list of 26 stone crusher which are existing in NDZ to Learned Counsel
for Respondent Nos. 5 to 15 and Respondent No.4 within a period of one
week...”.
Order Dt. 7Th September, 2012:
The Hon'ble Tribunal in the matter 38/2011 opined, in respect of operation of stone crusher
units, brick kilns and other units operating in and around NDZ, vide Para No. 33, 34 and 35
which are quoted below:“33. Therefore we direct the Authorities to take following actions:(a) The 11 (eleven) stone crushers which according to CPCB report, arelocated within the NDZ are non-functional at present Since those 11 (eleven)stone crushers have been established/allowed to be established witin NDZ incontravention of the 1996 Notification the state Government is directed totake immediate steps to remove all those illegal stone crushers except 1(one) M/s Assam stone crusher from the NDZ area forthwith.
It appears M/s Assam Stone Crusher was installed before 1996 i.e prior to
the notification. But then, operation of the said stone crusher unit would
cause nsignificant air pollution apart from noise pollution and would lead toadverse impact on the eco-system. The State of Assam is therefore, directed
to take steps to relocated the said unit outside the NDZ. In other words, thesaid unit should not be allowed to operate in its present location withimmediate effect.
(b) The Government shall take appropriate steps not to allow operation of the 23
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 26 of 402

(twenty three) stone crusher units existing in the vicinity of NDZ ( outside
the NDZ) till necessary pollution control equipments and other measures are
installed to eradicate the pollution, to the satisfaction of Assam Pollution
Control Board and Central Pollution Control Board.
(c) According to the CPCB report 34 (thirty four) Brick kilns are operating
within NDZ out of which only 1 (one) unit was set up before1996. Brick Kilns
being the main pollution causing units are hazardous to environment. The
said 33 (thirty three) Brick Kilns should be closed down immediately.
So far as 1 (one) Brick kiln which was established before 1996, is concerned
steps should be taken to either relocate it outside the demarcated zone or
steps should also be taken to insist stricter air pollution control devices. The
unit should be inspected by the SPCB, Assam regularly and CPCB
occasionally so as to ensure that the pollution level of the unit is within
control. No extension shall be granted to the said unit after expiry of its leaseor permission at its present location.
(d) The CPCB report further reveals that 11 (eleven) miscellaneous industries
are existing within NDZ. Out of them 4 (four) are fuel dispensing stations(petrol pumps), 1 (one) is a saw mill, 1 (one) oil tanker making unit (steel
fabrication), 1 (one) is a restaurant (under construction), 1 (one) concrete
making unit, 2 (two) mustered oil mills and 1 (one) flour mill.
Out of the aforesaid 11 (eleven) industries, except 4 (four) petrol pumps andthe restaurant all other units generated lots of pollution, therefore, theyshould not be allowed to operate in their present locations and action should
be taken to shift them immediately out of NDZ.
(e) The CPCB report further reveals that there are 25 (twenty five)Tea Factories
out of which 22 (twenty two) are located within the NDZ and 3 (three) arewithin 500 m of outer periphery of NDZ. It appears the CPCB could visit only
13 (thirteen) Tea Leaf processing Factories, due to flood, situation in
Assam. The report reveals that only 1 (one) unit has made arrangements totreat its effluent. The rest 22 (twenty two) tea processing units located within
NDZ have installed boilers for which, coal, oil, wood is the main feed stock.
They have also not installed any pollution control devices.
The SPCB and other Authorities are directed to ensure that no tea
processing units having boiler using fossil fuel operates within the NDZ andtake immediate steps to stop their operation.
The 3 (three) tea leaf processing units located within 500 m of the outer
periphery of NDZ should be allowed to operate Only if necessary pollution
control measures as may be stipulated by SPCB, Assam are adhered to by
those units.
Further, all the tea processing units must provide acoustical enclosures intheir electrical generators for providing alternative electricity.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 27 of 402

These are only some remedial measures, it is open to MoEF, CPCB and
SPCB to adopt any other appropriate measure and take any other steps
permissible under law to remove all the industrial units from NDZ andprescribe stringent standards to eradicate pollution so far as industrial units
situated outside NDZ but in its close proximity, say within 500 meters.
34. The MoEF and the State Government are directed to prepare a Comprehensive
Action plan and Monitoring Mechanism for implementation of the conditions stipulated in
the 1996 Notification specifying “No Development Zone” and for inspection, verificationand monitoring of the prohibitions imposed in the notification referred to above, as well as
the provisions of Rule-5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
35. After giving the matter a conscious thought and after taking into account all the factors,
we are of the opinion that MoEF and the State Government of Assam have totally failed intheir duties with respect to implementation of the provisions of the 1996 Notification anddue to the callous and indifferent attitude exhibited by the Authorities, number of polluting
industries / units were established in and around the No Development Zone of Kaziranga
thereby posing immense threat to the biodiversity, eco-sensitive zone, ecology as well as
environment. We are, further, satisfied that this ia s clear case of infringement of law. We,
therefore, have no hesitation to direct the MoEF and the Government of Assam to deposit
Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each, with the Director, Kaziranga National Park forconservation and restoration of flora and fauna as well as biodiversity, eco-sensitive zone,
ecology and environment of the vicinity of Kaziranga National park in general and within
the No Development Zone in particular. The said amount shall be utilized exclusively by
the Director, Kaziranga National Park for conservation, protection and restoration as well
as for afforestation of suitable trees of the local species in and around the No development
Zone.”
In view of the above orders of the Hon'ble Tribunal, there have been several
review petition cases and Miscellaneous cases arising out of the OA, notedamong them being Misc case No. 82/2012 by tea gardens, 78-96/2013
pertaining to brick kilns, 179/2012 pertaining to the Indian Tea Association,
181-200/2012 pertaining to 20 tea gardens, Review Case No. 37/2012 of KBI
brick industries,
In case of the review case No. 37/2012, the Hon'ble Tribunal passed thejudgement on 10th January, 2013 as, “we are not inclined to review our judgment or
directions issued at the instance of the Applicant. The Applicant cannot be permitted tofunction within the No Development Zone of Kaziranga National Park in the absence of theconsent. Liberty is however granted to the Applicant to approach the concerned Authorities
for granting consent/permission. If such an attempt is made it should be open to the
Authorities to consider the Application strictly in consonance with the Rules. On verification
if the Authorities are satisfied that the Applicant’s unit is situated beyond the NDZ and is a
non-polluting one and does not lead to congestion, they may consider and pass necessaryorders stipulating such conditions as would be deemed just and proper for conservationand protection of Kaziranga National Park, of course subject to the conditions imposed in
the No Development Zone Notification.”
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 28 of 402

Orders under the OA 174/2013:
The OA 174/2013 concerns the NH37, which according to the one of the conditions of theEnvironmental Clearance given by the MoEF, is to derecognize the NH37 between
Jakhlabandha and Numaligarh, and divert the highway elsewhere within a decade of thesetting up of the refinery. On the 9 th October, 2013 the Hon'ble Tribunal passed thefollowing orders, “Prima facie, we are of the considered opinion that NH-37 passing
through Jakhalabandha to Bokakhat going through Kaziranga National Park is not only
violation of the conditions imposed by Ministry of Environment and Forests while granting
permission for this Project but is certainly violation of environment particularly the wildlife.
The photographs placed before us show ruthless killings of exceptional species of animals
in these zones by heavy and rash traffic. We would have proceeded to pass an Orderprohibiting plying of any vehicles on this road. However, Learned counsel appearing for
the State of Assam submits that they would come out with a concrete proposal which theywould implement forthwith to protect the wildlife and the national sanctuary as well. In viewof the above, we grant one week’s time to the State of Assam to prepare the complete
project report in consultation with Ministry of Environment and Forests (for short ‘MoEF’)
and place the same on record. Further, it should also state as that steps have been taken
in furtherance to the Order of the MoEF dated 31 st May, 1991 till today. An Affidavit in thisregard will be filed by Chief Secretary of State of Assam. In the meanwhile, we restrain
the State of Assam from widening and shouldering of the road in question.”
1.1.3 No Development Zone
Recognizing the fact that “Kaziranga National Park with Headquarter at Bokhakat
in the State of Assam is the home of three-fourth of the total population of
Rhino and contains largest single concentration of endangered species wild
animals like swamp-deer, wild-bufalo, elephants, tigers and Gangetic Dolphinsand it is the only park of its kind with a viable low land grassland ecosystem inSouth Asia” and that “a Petroleum Refinery at Numaligarh (East of Kaziranga) and thedevelopmental activities for said refinery is likely to cause tremendous pressure on thenatural resources and the wild-life habitat in the Kaziranga National Park and its
surroundings” vide Notification dated 5 th July, 1996, the Ministry of Environment andForest, Govt. of India created a No Development Zone around the Numaligarh Refinery bystating “And whereas it is proposed to create a "No Development Zone" within a radius of
15 km around the said refinery site except towards North West where the "No
Development Zone" shall extend right up to the eastern boundary of the said park;” and“Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub section (1) and clause (v) of
sub section (2) of Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) readwith clause (d) of sub clause (3) read with sub rule (4) of rule 5 of the Environment(Protection) Rules, 1986, the Central Government hereby directs that on and from the dateof publication of this notification the expansion of industrial area, townships, infrastructure
facilities and such other activities which could lead to pollution and congestion shall not beallowed within “No Development Zone” specified in the Appendix to this Notification,
except with prior approval of the Central Government emphasis supplied.”
The Appendix provides the corners of the NDZ. However, the words “except towards NorthWest where the "No Development Zone" shall extend right up to the eastern boundary of
the said park” seems to be escaping attention of all. The interpretation of all, including the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 29 of 402

Hon'ble National Green Tribunal is confined to the coordinates given in the appendix. If theintension of the NDZ is to protect the Kaziranga National Park and its surroundings, asmentioned in the notification, then the area covered by the coordinates of the NDZ and the“exception” clause put together only cover a small portion of the Park, as most of the Park
lies to the west of the NDZ, and does not seem to be covered. The length of the Kaziranga
National Park from its easternmost top point to the end of the southern boundary is morethan 85 km in length, of which the NDZ covers less than 15 km on the eastern side.
Further, no activities are allowed inside the national Park boundary anyway under the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 making the “exception” clause redundant. Therefore,
potentially a polluting industry could be set up very close to the Park, and yet outside the
National Park as well as the NDZ, thereby nullifying the very purpose why the NDZ wascreated in the first place. Therefore, in the opinion of the author, the NDZ does not serve
any purpose other than creating a dichotomy in Kaziranga hinterland, unless theboundaries contained in the “exception” clause get modified to something like “except
towards North West where the "No Development Zone" shall extend upto a radius of 15km all along and right up to the eastern and southern boundary of the said park”.
1.2

Order Dt. 12Th June, 2014 in the PIL 66/2012

The order Dt. 12Th June in the PIL 66/2012 in the Division Bench was as follows:“(A.M. Sapre, C.J.)
Heard Mr.TJ Mahanta, learned Amicus, Mr. PN Choudhury, learned Amicus, Mrs. Rita BoroBora, learned counsel, Mr. D.P. Chaliha, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.
Borthakur, learned counsel, Mr. S. Upadhay, learned counsel, for the petitioners. Also
heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, for the respondents.
Pursuant to our previous order dated 26.5.2014, Mr. M.K. Yadav, Director, Kaziranga
National Part is also present in person. We heard the views of the respective lawyers
appearing including Mr. Yadav. According to him, the report, which he is supposed to file, isalready underway and would take some more time to submit. He wants a month's time todo the needful to enable him to submit an exhaustive report on all the issues such asconservation and preservation of the most priceless endangered species - 'Rhino' in
Kaziranga National Part and its adjacent areas. Having regard to the nature of work to beundertaken and the work already done, we grant one month's time to submit the report,
preferably by the next date of hearing, to enable this Court to peruse the same for taking adecision after hearing all the parties concerned.
List these cases on 5th August, 2014.
On the next date of hearing, Mr. M.K. Yadav is to remain personally present.”
1.3

Order Dt. 4Th March, 2013

The order Dt. 12Th June in the PIL 66/2012 in the Division Bench was as follows, “(A.M. Sapre, C.J.)
Today we have heard the views of Mr. M. K. Yadav, Director, Kaziranga National Park, who
is present in person and also heard the views of several learned counsel appearing forvarious organizations and stakeholders on the various problems faced by Kaziranga

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 30 of 402

National Park and in particular with regard to poaching of rhinos which has caused serious
concern to all.
Mr. Yadav, Director, Kaziranga National Park, submitted that sincere steps are being taken
to curb poaching at any cost. He also submits that Government be granted around twomonths time to prepare high quality methodical report to suggest various proposals forcurbing poaching on a permanent basis and also on related issues dealing with the Parkand to preserve the endangered species “Rhino”.
We express our serious concern about the incidences of poaching in Kaziranga National
Park which have recently taken place and are taking place from time to time, we view it
seriously. At any cost, in our view, the same must be stopped at the earliest to save thenature's most priceless and precious endangered species “Rhino”. Indeed, it is our duty topreserve this God's gift to this world at any cost.
We grant two months time to the Director, Kaziranga National Park to submit the detailreport on or before the next date of hearing suggesting therein the effective and remedial
steps for implementation to curb poaching of “rhinos” in the Kaziranga National Park. He is
at liberty to take help of all stakeholders, organizations, parks all over the world for
preparation of report.
We request Mr. Yadav, Director, Kaziranga National Park, to remain present on every dateof hearing to facilitate the hearing on the matter.
List on 26th of May, 2014.”
1.4

Methodology

A five pronged strategy was adopted for compilation of the high quality report as directedby the Hon'ble High Court. These were:
1. Holding of stakeholders' meetings
2. Holding of an International Conclave on Kaziranga
3. Preparation of an Approach Paper on Kaziranga
4. Holding discussion with national and international experts and peer review
5. Original survey and data collection
1.4.1

Stakeholders Meetings

The first stakeholders meeting was held at Kohora on the 15 th March, 2014 in which 17
different stakeholders participated. Several key decisions were taken and it was alsodecided to hold a bigger meeting of the stakeholders. Accordingly, on the 27 th of April,2014, the 2nd meeting of the Stakeholders was held at Kohora with a day long programme.
It was a national level participation and about 50 members attended the meeting including
local stakeholders. It was in this meeting that it was decided to approach the PSUs andother companies for funding through CSR. It was also decided to constitute an authority forbetter management of the areas around Kaziranga.
Another meeting with the members of the local press and media was organized at Kohora
on the 4th May, 2014. The meeting was very fruitful. Another meeting was held with the
Karbi Anglong forest authorities on 10 th April, 2014 at Kohora. Stress was laid on the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 31 of 402

conservation of the watershed to the south of Kaziranga in this meeting. It was followed byanother meeting at Diphu on the 9 th May, 2014 along with PCCF(WL) and the Addl. PCCF
(Admin) to open a wildlife division in Karbi Anglong so that better protection to these areas
could be accorded.
1.4.2

International Conclave on Kaziranga

The 3rd meetings with the stakeholders and the International Conclave on Kaziranga washeld on the 20th May, 2014 at Guwahati in which the local people and members of press
and media also participated. There were several delegates from outside India, some ofwhom participated through Video Conference. Some of the key experts who participated in
the meetings were Dr. Richard Emslie of IUCN, Mr. A. Christie Williams of WWF from
Nepal, Dr. Bibhab Talukdar from Indonesia.
It was followed by a seminar on RhoDIS in which two South African Experts namely Dr.
Rodrick Potter and Dr. Cindy Harper participated. It was followed by a discussion and fieldvisit to Kaziranga. The DDG, Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation,
Govt. of Nepal, Mr. Tikaram Adhikari also participated. He shared his positive experiencesof controlling poaching in Chitwan by conferring magisterial powers to the Chief Warden.
1.4.3

Preparation of Approach Paper on Kaziranga

An “Approach Paper on Issues and Possible Solutions for Protection of the One Horned
Rhinoceros in Kaziranga National Park Pursuant to the Order of the Hon'ble Gauhati High
Court Dt. 4Th April, 2014 in PIL 66/2012” was drafted and widely circulated using the newly
created official web portal of the Kaziranga National Park. An advertisement was also
inserted in the local press for the people to download and send their opinions. The
document was also sent to the Govt. of Assam for wide circulation and eliciting opinion ofvarious Govt. departments. The Approach Paper was highly appreciated, and it generated
a lot of discussion among various stakeholders, media and press.
1.4.4

Panel of Experts

A panel of experts from the national and international arena, including local stakeholders
and members of media and intellectual class were chosen. Initially a small nucleus ofexperts was selected which grew quite a big towards the end. The approach paper wascirculated to all of the panel members. Several comments were also received. Based on
the inputs, the compilation of report was started. The chapters were circulated for peer
review. Each of the members were also asked to share the write up with others so that awider audience could be reached. In this manner, all the decision making and strategic
chapters were circulated. The write ups circulated were Chapters 2 to 7 Part I, andChapter 11-18 of Part II. The comments and opinions received from various members inthis regard are annexed in Part III of the Report.
The panel of experts is provided separately at the end of this Chapter as Acknowledgment.
1.4.5

Original Survey and Data Collection

Another hallmark of this Report is that a lot of effort was put towards generating field level
data and primary research. As a result, several new facts emerged, which gave a definitive
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 32 of 402

direction to the Report. In this regard the help and assistance accorded by the officers andstaff of Kaziranga is acknowledged, noted among them being Sri S.K. Sealsarma IFS,DFO, Eastern Assam Wildlife Division, Sri Pankaj Sharma, ACF, Sri Sunnydeo Indradeo
Choudhury IFS ACF, Sri Ramen Das, ACF, Sri Rabindra Sharma, Wildlife Research
Officer, Sri Tarun Gogoi, FrI who collected quite a lot of field data at short notices.
Acknowledgment is also due to the WWF teams, especially Mr. Amit Sharma, Dr. Bibhab
Talukdar of Aaranyak, Mr. Rahul Dutta of IRF, Mr. Rathin Barman of WTI, who carried out
several original studies by themselves and their expert teams. The following studies wereconducted:
1. Corridor survey and mapping
2. Corridor animal Movement Survey by WWF
3. Islands of the river Brahmaputra: The Connecting Corridors” by WWF
4. Corridor Change detection study using satellite data by Dr. Bibhab Talukdar
5. Erosion and Bankline study of Kaziranga using satellite images
6. Socio-economic survey of the EDC villages by WWF
7. Field demonstration of anti poaching technologies
8. Elephant Mortality causes and remedy
Not all of these have been compiled in form of a Report. However, every effort should bemade to make this Reports and observation in appropriate scientific documentation
formats.
1.4.6

Final Review

The Report is under circulation to various Departments of the Government of Assam fortheir valuable comments vide Letter No. FRM.270/2012/297 Dt. 23 Rd July, 2014 of theEnvironment & Forest Department. The comments are expected anytime. A supplement
would be prepared compiling the comments of the various departments.
1.5

Acknowledgment

Special thanks are due to Sri Jitesh Khosla IAS, Chief Secretary, Assam for espousing thecause of Kaziranga and guiding us all the time. He has been very supportive, especially at
the times of crises. Hope to continue getting his support for improving conditions in
Kaziranga. He has also been the source of inspiration to go for the green growth and low
carbon strategies for development in the landscape. Thanks are also due to Sri S.C. Das
IAS, Addl CS, Revenue and Disaster Management for always supporting and guiding forsake of Kaziranga. Thanks are due to Sri Davinder Garcha IAS, Principal Secretary to theGovt. of Assam, Department of Environment & Forests, for having encouraged to go
ahead and take bold decisions. He took personal initiative and time to visit Kaziranga andunderstand its myriads of problems and issues. He also deserves to be thanked for taking
up the issue of erosion in the Park with the Water resources Department.
The author is thankful to Sri V.K. Vishnoi IFS, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & the
Head of the Forest Force, Assam, for having ignited my mind. Several of the management
strategies are output of the fruitful discussions with him. The author is also thankful to Sri
R.P. Agarwalla IFS, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) & The Chief Wildlife
Warden, Assam who has been providing rock solid support and guidance all along andalso he had been kind enough to spare time to sit through most of the stakeholders'meetings, and the initiatives for securing the watershed of Kaziranga by taking initiatives tocreate a separate wildlife division in Karbi Anglong.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 33 of 402

Thanks are also due to Sri Rajesh Gopal, IFS, Member Secretary, NTCA, Govt. of India forbeing very positive for Kaziranga. Thanks are also due to his team members Sri D.P.
Bankhwal IFS, IG (Regional Office), NTCA and Sri S.P. Yadav IFS, DIG, NTCA, New Delhi
for constructive suggestions and management inputs for the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve.
Thanks are also due to Sri B.S. Bonal IFS, Member Secretary, Central Zoo Authority ofIndia for participating in the deliberations and providing valuable suggestions to make theReport comprehensive.
Thanks are due to Sri D. Mathur IFS, Addl PCCF (Admin & Vigil), for being alive with theissues plaguing the Park, especially matters of shortage of staff. I am sure with hisintervention and good wishes of the PCCF & Hoff, we shall be able to wipe out the long
pending staff shortage issues. Thanks are also due to Sri O.P. Pandey IFS, Addl. PCCF
(Projects), Sri A.H. Khan Addl. PCCF (IT), Sri A.K. Singh IFS, Addl PCCF (CAMPA) for
being very supportive of Kaziranga.
Thanks are indeed due to Sri M.G.V.K.Bhanu, IAS, PS to Hon'ble CM for taking the lead to
set up the Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force. Thanks are due to Sri R.M. Singh IPS, Addl.
DGP(STF) and his team of dedicated officials for leading the ARPTF from the front.
Thanks are due to Sri Rajiv Kr. Bora IAS, Principal Secretary, IT Department and Sri
Anurag Goel IAS, Commisisoner & Secretary, IT Department for allowing registration andhosting of the domain http://kaziranga.assam.gov.in at a very short notice and thereby
enabling the process of international consultation immediately after the order of the
Hon'ble High Court. Thanks are due to Sri G.D. Tripathi IAS, Commissioner & Secretary,Home, for keeping the trouble at bay when it comes to Kaziranga. Thanks are also due to
Sri M.C. Boro, Special Commissioner & Secretary, PWD (Roads) and Sri A.C. Bordoloi,
Special Commissioner & Secretary, PWD (Building and NH) for espousing the cause of
Kaziranga.
Thanks are due to Smt. Nafifa Ahmed IAS, Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Departmentof Environment & Forests, for giving due priority to Kaziranga and being responsive to its
requirements. Thanks is also due to her entire team in the Department who work tirelessly
and are very quick in action when it comes to sorting out issues of Kaziranga.
Thanks are due to Sri A. Rabha IFS, Addl PCCF(KA) for his initiatives to help Kaziranga.
Thanks are also due to Sri A.K. Johri, IFS, Addl PCCF (Biodiversity & CC), Dr. Alka
Bhargava IFS, CCF(REWP), Sri S. Ahmed IFS, CCF(Nodal & FC Act), Sri Hirdesh Mishra
IFS, CF(WL), Sri Utpal Bora IFS, CF(HQ), Sri K. N. Barman IFS, CF(SFM), Sri C.R.
Bhobora, IFS CF(PO-I) for their precious time and valuable suggestions in making thisReport meaningful. Thanks are also due to the officials and members of the Legal Cell
under the Chairmanship of Sri A.H. Khan IFS, Addl. PCCF (IT) for examining the Reportand recommending its submission to the Hon'ble Gauhati High court on the 5 th August,2014.
Thanks are due to Sri Syed Iftikhar Hussain IAS, Divisional Commissioner, Upper Assam
Division and Chairman, Local Advisory Committee, KTR. Thanks are due to Sri Ashok
Babu, IAS, DC, Nagaon, Smt. Julie Sonowal IAS, DC, Golaghat, Sri Mrigesh Narayan
Baruah, ACS, SDO (Civil) Bokakhat, Sri Arabinda Kalita IPS, SP, Nagaon, Sri S. Chetia
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 34 of 402

IPS, SP, Golaghat for providing excellent support and field level coordination in tacklingpoaching and other ground support. Thanks is also due to their entire teams.
Thanks are due to Sri D. Saikia, Addl Advocate General, Sri P. N. Choudhury, Amicus
Curaie, Sri Sanjay Upadhyaya, Counsel, Sri Gautam Uzir Counsel, Sri Chandra Baruah,Counsel and other counsels of the various stakeholders in the PIL for being part of the
stakeholders initiative and giving valuable inputs to make the Report meaningful.
Thanks are to all my colleagues and personnel of Kaziranga who have been working
tirelessly all this while and at the same time providing me the valuable inputs for theReport. Thanks are due to Sri M. N. Duara IFS, CF for taking care of the RTI issues.
Thanks are due to Sri S.K. Sealsarma IFS, DFO, EAWL for providing valuable inputs andactive support all throughout the period from the day of the order of the Hon'ble Court inmaking the endeavour a great success. Mention is made of Sri Chandan Bora DCF, DFO,
Assam State Zoo and his entire team, Sri M.M. Pujari, Principal Consultant, SEMT, IT
Department, Govt. of Assam, Sri Gautam Das, Asstt Manager, AMTRON and his team forproviding logistic support in holding the International Conclave at Guwahati. Special thanks
to the data center and network team of AMTRON for providing constant support in hosting
the Kaziranga domain. Special thanks are due to Sri Deepak Goswami, SIO, NIC, Assam
Unit and Sri Diganta Barman, Sr. Technical Director, NIC Assam Unit. Thanks are due to
Sri Anupam Barman, sr. Systems consultant, AMTRON for being the honorary systemadministratoroftheKaziranga
official
portalandmaintainingthe
http://kaziranga.assam.gov.in site. Special mention is made of Sri Pradipta Barua, ACF i/c
Western Range, Sri Mukul Tamuli, Range officer, Central Range, Sri Salim Ahmed, Range
Officer, Eastern Range, Sri J.R. Bordoloi, Range Officer, Burapahar Range, Sri Rupak
Bhuyan FrI for providing various inputs and gathering information from the field. Special
thanks are due to Sri Munindra Kumar Bordoloi, Jr. Asstt,, Sri Binaram Morang, Sr. Asstt,
Smt. Gitanjali Kalita, Jr. Asstt, Smt. Arupoma Chetia, Sr. Asstt., Sri Santanu Phukan, RadioTechnician Of the office of the Director, KNP, Sri Ajit Sikia, Head Assistant, Sri Dilip
Sharma, FrI, Sri Anil Kr. Bora, Sr. Asstt, Sri Ajay Borthakur, Sr. Asstt, Sri Dibya Jyoti Boraof the office of the DFO, EAWL for providing office, secretarial and other assistance incompiling the Report.
The credits for the photographs go to Sri Pankaj Sharma ACF, Sri Ramen Das ACF, Sri
Sunny Choudhury ACF, Sri Pradipta Barua ACF, Sri Rabindra Sharma Wildlife Research
Officer, Sri Mukul Tamuli RO, Sri Salim Ahmed RO. Some of the photographs are also by
the Author. Credits for the photographs from South Africa go to Sri S.K. Sealsarma IFS and
Sri Rathin Barman. Thanks to Sri Kaushik Barua for photographs and inputs on the K-9
Dog Squad. For all GIS works and maps, due credit goes to Sri Kuleshwar Sinha of theoffice of the CCF(REWP), Assam. Thanks are due to Sri Kulen Chandra Das, Asstt.
Professor, Nagon Girls' College, Nagon for the EDC baseline survey data analysis.
Thanks are also due to the local stakeholders and representative citizens of Kaziranga foropen dialogues and friendly discussions to make this Report more people friendly andalive to the requirements of the fringe populations around Kaziranga. Special mention ismade of Sri Munindra Nath Sharma, President, Sri Hem Chandra Bora, Advisor &Principal of Kaziranga College, Sri Animesh Saikia, Coordinator of the Greater Kaziranga
Human Resource and Environment Protection Committee, Sri Uttam Saikia, Honarary
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 35 of 402

Wildlife Warden, Sri Jitu Sharma Rajkhowa, President, All Assam Journalist Union, Sri
Khanjan Nath, President, Kaziranga Suraksha Samiti, Sri Swapan Nath, Local
Correspondent, Kaziranga, Sri Kamal gogoi, Aashray Lodge, Kaziranga and Sri Bhaskar
Jyoti Baruah, Spokesperson, Tour Operators Association of Assam, among others. Thanks
are due to all the Chairmen of the EDCs who participated in the Stakeholders'deliberations and provided valuable inputs. Special thanks are due to Sri Deba Pratim
Bora, Member, EDC Bosagaon, Sri Kalidas Upadhyay, Member, Kohora EDC, Sri Dilip
Dutta, President, Japaripathar EDC, Sri Jagat Bahadur Chhetry, President, Difaloopathar
EDC, Sri Mangal Singh Teron, President Natundanga EDC, Sri Dilip Borah, President,
Deopani EDC, Sri Deepak Gogoi, President Mohpara EDC, Sri Jayant Rajkhowa,
President, Kuthuri EDC, Sri Lambi Ram Ingti, Member, Chilimkhowa EDC, Sri Sashiram
Pegu, President Dhanbari EDC.
Special thanks are due to Dr. Richard Emslie, Dr. Keryn Adcock, Dr. Tony Conway, ChairKZN Rhino Management Group and Member, IUCN SSC, AfRSG, Dr. Rodrick B. Potter,for reviewing chapters, providing additional inputs and information to make this Reportworth its salt. Special thanks are due to Dr. Richard Emslie who painstakingly reviewed
most of the Chapters line by line. Special thanks are due to Sri Amit Sharma for compilingthe Expert Panel biosketches and providing the write up on IRV 2020, Sri Rahul Dutta forworking on the proposed amendments to the WPA, Dr. K. Ramesh for the write up on the
UAV, Ms. Rachna Yadav for providing the write up on the “People's Framework”, andreviewing Chapter 15, Dr. R. K. Goswami of the Water Resources Department in helping toarrive at estimates for erosion control measures, Sri Shantanoo Bhattacharyya, Nodal
Officer, PWD(NH) for providing inputs on the NH37 including budgetary estimates ofvarious works involved. Thanks are due to Mr. A. Christie Williams, WWF Internationaland Mr. Tikaram Adhikari, Govt. of Nepal for providing inputs on the wildlife crime
management in Nepal. Thanks are due to Dr. Anwar Uddin Choudhury IAS and Dr.
Jayanta Das of FREMAA for providing valuable inputs and compiling the Publication List
on Kaziranga till 2009 which is included in this Report as Additional Reference material.
Thanks are also due to the management of wikipedia, which has been used extensively ingathering and collating information on diverse subjects and issues. Thanks are due to ms.
Arundhati Yadava for compiling the Acronyms and Abbreviations and listing theReferences and Bibliography. Thanks are due to Ms. Ekansha Yadava for running the“printing press” to bring out, on several occasions, hundreds of pages of print-outs forintermediate proof readings. Thanks are to all the Grade III and Grade IV Staff of the
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve and the office of the CCF(REWP) for providing logistic support tothe author.
Thanks are also due to Smt. Sonali Ghosh, IFS, CF, Manas National Park/ Tiger Reserve,
Sri Sushil Kumar Daila IFS, CF i/c Rajiv Gandhi Orang National Park, Sri P. Sivakumar
IFS, CF, i/c Nagaon Wildlife Division comprising of Laokhowa and Burachapori wildlife
sanctuaries as a part of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, Sri Rajendra Garawad IFS, DFO,
Western Assam wildlife Division and i/c Nameri Tiger Reserve, Sri D.D. Gogoi IFS, DFO,
Guwahati Wildlife Division and i/c Pobitora wildlife sanctuary, for providing valuable inputs
in the Report. Special thanks to Smt. S. Ghosh and Sri R. Garawad for providing criticalreviews of the Report and valuable inputs. Thanks to all of them for giving area specificinputs on status of rhino and the corridors, which has mostly gone into the Assam Rhino

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 36 of 402

Range Expansion Project conceptualization. Thanks are due to Sri F. Rehman IFS, DFO,O/O PCCF(WL), Assam for providing reports and data as inputs to the Report.
Special thanks are due to civil society members, senior journalists and wildlife activists
who participated in the various stakeholders' meetings ad offered their valuablesuggestions and opinion. Special mention is made of Prof. Dr. Deven Dutta, former headof the English department and former Principal Cotton College, Sri Samudra Gupta
Kasyap, Sri Beda Brat Bora, Dr. P. C. Bhattachrjee, Sri Rupak Goswami of Telegraph, Sri
Dudul Choudhury of HELP, Smt. Maini Mahanta, Nandini, Prof. Dr. Anup Gogoi, E&EE
Department, IIT Guwahati, Dr. Arup Jyoti Saikia, Associate Professor & Head, HSS
Department, IIT Guwahati.
Thanks, once again, to all the national and international level experts, scientists,
researchers, stakeholders, senior journalists and respected citizens. This Report has been
an outcome of a whirlpool of stakeholders churnings, criticisms and developing mutual
understanding for each other. Above all this Report has been through the corners of theworld and minds and hearts of people who love Kaziranga and want it to be there till
eternity.
“.Kaziranga, thou shalt, with thy rhinoceros in thine backyard, liveth for eternity.”[If you want to know about Kaziranga, then, please go to Chapter 9 first]

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 37 of 402

The Expert Panel & Peer Review Group
SL
No
1

Name

E-mail Address

Brief Introduction

A. Christy Williams

acwill69@yahoo.com

2

Amit Sharma

amitsharma_ghy@sify.com

3

Animesh Saikia

animeshsaikia@yahoo.com

4

Anupam Barman

barman.anupam@gmail.com

5

Arup Jyoti Saikia

arupjyotisaikia@gmail.com
arupjyoti@iitg.ernet.in

6Asad Rahmani

rahmani.asad@gmail.com

7

B.S. Bonal

bonalbishian@gmai.com

He is the Coordinator AREAS, WWF
International and is a keen wildlife
conservationist.
Heisvastlyexperienced in the scientific works
and conservation of the Asian
Elephants and Rhinos all around
Asia. He is also possess a richexperience of working in Assam andNorth East India.
He is the Coordinator Rhino
Conservation for WWF-India and isbased in Assam. He is experienced
in wildlife conservation since morethan last 10 years and is also
trained and experienced in the fieldof GIS. Remote Sensing and Social
works. He is also a member of the
Asian Rhino Specialist GroupHe is the coordinator of the Greater
Kaziranga Human Resource andEnvironment Protection Committee,
Bokakhat. He represents the local
stakeholders who are fighting forretaining NH 37 Highway.
He is Sr Systems Consultant,
AMTRON,
and
is
the
site
administrator for the Kaziranga
Portal http://kaziranga.assam.gov.in
He is a professor in the HSS
department, Indian Institute ofTechnology, Guwahati and a noted
historian on forestry and wildlife
conservation. He has several books
on forestry and wildlife to his credit.
He is one of the most famous birdconservationist in India and the
Director of BNHS based at Mumbai.
He has been advocating theprotection of Important Bird andBiodiversity Areas in India.
He is an IFS officer highly
experienced in working for the
Indian Rhinos. Its conservation andprotection. He is also experienced inplanning and executing rhinotranslocations and is currently theMember Secretary of Central Zoo
Authority, Govt. of India and also amember of the Asian Rhino
Specialist Group. He also has been
the former Director of Kaziranga
National Park. He has a longstanding experience in wildlife
management both in in-situ and ex-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 38 of 402

8Beda Brata Borabora.beda@gmail.com

9

Bhaskar J. Boruahbhankarjboruah@gmail.com

10

Bibhab Talukdar

bibhav@aaranyak.org

11

Bittu Sahgal

bittu@sanctuaryasia.com

12

Chandan Bora, DCF

chandanbora21@gmail.com

13

Chandan Boruah

cndboruah@yahoo.co.in

14

D.P. Bankhwal, IFS

Igntca.ghyt@gmail.com

PIL 66/2012

situ for more than 27 years that
includes more than 7 years in
Kaziranga National Park as DFO
and Director, as Dy. Field Director in
Manas National Park and Director,
Assam State Zoo, Guwahati andNational Zoological Park, New
Delhi. He played a key role asFounder Chief Operating Officer(COO) of Core Committee of Task
Force for Rhino Translocation within
Assam under IRV 2020.
He is a senior journalist of Assamand at present he is the Executive
Editor, Jansadharan Assamese daily
at Guwahati.
He is an entrepreneur and runs
resorts in Agoratoli. He is also theManaging Director, Luit Holidays
Joint Secretary & Spokesperson,
Tour Operators Association of
Assam (TOAA) and Member Local
Advisory Committee of Kaziranga
Tiger Reserve.
He is the SG of Aaranyak andCoordinator Asia Program for
IRF. He is highly experienced inrhino conservation and is the current
Chair of the Asian Rhino Specialist
Group. He is a keen wildlife
conservationist and has authored anumber of technical documents onrhinos and elephants. He is also amember of IUCN's African Rhino
Specialist Group; and co-authoredmandated joint IUCN/TRAFFIC
reports on Asian and African Rhinos
for the last
two CITES COP's.
He is the founder editor of
Sanctuary Asia, India’s premier
wildlife and ecology magazine. He isan environmental activist and writeralso working at the forefront toprotect India from the worst impactsof the climate change.
He is from the Assam Forest
Department and at present Director,
Assam State Zoo. He has a long
workingexperiencein
Karbi
Anglong District.
He is the Standing Counsel for theGovt. of India in the Hon’ble GauhatiHigh Court.
He is an IFS Officer of Assam
Meghalaya Cadre, an avid wildlifer
and at Regional NTCA Office at

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 39 of 402

15

Devajit Saikia

lon1969@yahoo.com

16

Hirdesh Mishra IFS

hmplus@gmail.com

17

Jayanta Das

gibbonconservation@yahoo.com

18

K. Rameshramesh@wiigov.in

19

Kaushik Baruaassamelephantfoundation@gmai
l.com

20

Keryn Adcock

keryna@telkomsa.net

21

Keshav Kumar IPS

Keshabips86@hotmail.com

22

Keshav Vermakeshavsbarma@gmail.com

PIL 66/2012

Guwahati.
He is the Additional Advocate
General, Govt. of Assam andCounsel for the Govt. on the PIL
66/2012
He is an IFS Officer and theConservator of Forests (wildlife) in
the office of the PCCF(WL), Assam
He is an active wildlifer and served
for almost decade as the Large
Mammal Conservationist under
USF&WS projects of the Wildlife
Areas Development and Welfare
Trust, Guwahati.
He is senior scientist at the Wildlife
Institute of India, Dehradun, andhandles UAV and the otherassociated projects. He was on e ofthe key members of the UAV teamfor test flight of UAV at Kaziranga.
He is currently undertaking flighttrials at Panna Tiger Reserve.
He is an entrepreneur andenvironmentalist based in Guwahati.
He is the Director of Assam
Elephant
Foundation,highlyexperienced in working with both
domesticated and wild elephants
and is also experienced in rhinotranslocations. He is also a highly
experienced persons in handlingdifferent breed of dogs and ispresently working with the K9 in
Assam.
She is expert on African rhino and along standing member ofboth IUCN's African Rhino Specialist
Group and the SADC Rhino
Management Group. She is anexpert on black rhino population
performance, monitoring, habitat
suitability assessment and carrying
capacity estimation. She previously
worked for both the old Natal Parks
Board and Bop Parks Board. Since
1995 she has done the analysis forand compiled all the SADC RMG
annual black rhino status reportsynthesis reports.
He is 1986 batch IPS Officer ofGujarat cadre who has worked forwildlife crime and achieved major
break through in wildlife conviction.
He is a retired IAS officer of Gujarat
Cadre, served in various capacities,
including Program Director at the

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 40 of 402

23

Kushal K. Sarma

kushalkonwar@gmail.com

24
25

M.K. Yadava, IFS
Michael H Knight

mkyadav@gmail.com
mknight@nmmu.ac.za

26

Mrigesh Narayan
Baruah, ACS

mrigeshnboruah@gmail.com

27

Ms. Krishna Baruah,
ACS

Krishnabaruah3240@gmai.com

28

P. Shivakumar, IFS

sivakumarifs@gmai.com ,dfonagaonwl@gmail.com

29

P.C. Bhattacharyya

bhattapc@gmail.com

30

P.N. Choudhury

pnchouadvghc@gmail.com

31

Pankaj Sarma

nipusharma@gmail.com

PIL 66/2012

World Bank. He headed the Global
Tiger Initiative of the World Bank as
its Founding Director. He is also
honorary member of the Global
Tiger ForumHe is the Head, Dept. of Surgery
and Radiology in CVSC Khanapara.
He is highly experienced in the
management and conservation ofboth domestic and wild elephants.
He is also the lead veterinarian of
the rhino translocation team.
Director, Kaziranga National Park
He is a renowned conservationist
and expert on rhino and has
been a long standing member andis current Chair of both IUCN's
African Rhino Specialist Group andthe SADC Rhino Management
Group. He is Manager and Head ofSouth African National Parks's Park
Planning and Development Unit
where he has been involved innumerouspark
expansion/development projects. He is also
responsible for the delivery of
SANParks park management plans
and the state of biodiversity
reporting system.
He is the SDO (Civil), Bokakhat atpresent
andanimportantstakeholder in the conservation of
Kaziranga.
She is Project Director, DRDA,
Golaghat and is involved in thedevelopment of livelihood options
for the fringe villages of Kaziranga.
He is an IFS Officer and holds thepost of the DFO, Nagaon Wildlife
Division, Nagaon. He is responsible
for management of the Burachapori
and Laokhowa Wildlife Sanctuaries
under the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve.
He is a noted environmentalist andactive wildlife expert from Assam.
He retired as Prof and Head of the
Zoology
Department,
Gauhati
University. He is an Executive
Member of the Wildlife Trust ofIndia.
He is the Counsel with the Central
Bureau of Investigation, Govt. ofIndia, and Amicus Curiae in the
PIL66/2012.
He is the Asstt. Conservator ofForests, Kaziranga National Park.
He is also a noted naturalist and anavid birder. He has several papers

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 41 of 402

to his credit
Kaziranga

32

Prof. Deven Dutta

samudraguptad@gmail.com

33

Rabindra Sarma

kazirangaresearch@gmail.com

34

Rachna Yadav

rachnayadav@yahoo.com

35

Rahul Dutta

rahulmobile@gmail.com

36

Rajendra Garawad IFS

garawad@gmail.com

37

Rajendra P. Agarwalla,
IFS

Pccf.wl.assam@gmail.com

38

Rajesh Gopal, IFS

igntca@gmail.com

PIL 66/2012

on

avifaunain

He is the former Head of the
Department,
English,CottonCollege. He is a noted personality
and speaks for the cause ofenvironment, wildlife and forests.
He is the Wildlife Research Officerof the Kaziranga National Park. He
has rich experience in wildlife
research and has good knowledge
and database on Kaziranga. He is
associated with all major research
initiatives in the Park/Tiger Reserve.
With a Masters in Physics pursuing
Ph.D. From IIT Guwahati in the areaof Ecological Economics. Working
in the North East Region in thedevelopment sector for nearly two
decades. Worked with several Govt,
non
Govt
and
internationalorganizations such as CAPART,ICIMOD, UNICEF, UNDP, ADB and
NIRD. She also served as Visiting
Faculty at NIRD, NERC. Some ofherarticlesare@
IndianEnvironment Portal.
He is presently working forinternational Rhino Foundation andis experienced working in the field ofwildlife crime and investigations formore than 10 years. He earlier also
worked for TRAFFI-WWF programin India.
He is an IFS Officer and presently
Field
Director,
Nameri
Tiger
Reserve. He has done considerable
primary work on rhino population
dynamics
duringhis
M.Sc.
dissertation as part of his degree in
Conservation
andLand
Management, Bangor University, UK
He is the PCCF (Wildlife) and theChief Wildlife Warden, Assam. He
has a long standing experience inwildlife affairs and had also served
as Field Director, Manas Tiger
Reserve, and was one of thepersons responsible for turning
around Manas in the days of
disturbances in nineties. As theChief Wildlife Warden, he isprimarily
responsibleforadministration of all the Protected
Areas Network of Assam.
He is an IFS Officer and Member
Secretary, NTCA, Govt. of India, He

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 42 of 402

39Ramen C. Das

ramendas.afs@gmail.com

40

Ranjit Borthakur

ranjitborthakur@agilisys.co.uk

41

Raoul Du Toit

rdutoit@wwf.panda.org

42

Rathin Barman

rathin@wti.org.in

43

Ravi Singhravisingh@wwfindia.net

PIL 66/2012

has championed the cause of tiger
conservation in the country and isprimary responsible for setting up
NTCA and bringing new legislations
and Tiger Conservation Plan in the
country.
He is Asstt. Conservator of Forests,
Kaziranga National Park. He hasrich experience in community
relationship building and also hasrich experience in wildlife crime
investigation and prosecution.
He is founder and chairman of
Globally Manged Service. He brings
over 35 years of varied experienceinmanaging
businessandcompanies. He also supports andworks in the field of tourism,
technology,
environment
andconservation. He is the Secretary of
the Indian National Association of
the prestigious Club of Rome, and acrusader of green growth and low
carbon economy. He has authored
several books, including one on
Kaziranga. He is also the Chairmanof the Amalgamated Plantations Pvt.
Ltd.
He is a rhino conservationist, andcurrently Director of the Lowveld
Rhino Trust in Zimbabwe. He wasawardedtheGoldmanEnvironmental Prize in 2011 andIUCN SSC's Sir Peter Scott Medalin 2012 in recognition of his
exceptional efforts and successes in
the
field
of
AfricanRhino
conservation. Raoul's dedicationand technical know-how havecontributed significantly to theestablishment of effective rhino
monitoring systems, community
outreachprogrammes,
and
improved law enforcement efforts,
as well as hugely successful Black
Rhino translocation projects. He is alongstanding member of IUCN
SSC's African Rhino Specialist
Group.
He is the Deputy Director, WTI
based at Assam. He is trained
wildlife biologist and is working in
the field of wildlife conservation
including rescue and rehabilitationof rhinos and other animals sincemore than 10 years.
He is the Secretary General andSave Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 43 of 402

44Richard Emslie

emslieafrsg@telkomsa.net

45

Rodrick B. Potter

rodpotter@vodamail.co.za

46

Ron Chandler

ronchandeler@gamil.com

47

S.P. Yadav, IFS

digntca@gmail.com,
spyadavifs@gmail.com

48

S.K. Seal Sarma, IFS,

dfoeawl@gmail.com

49

Samudra Gupta
Kashyap
Sanjay Upadhyay

sgkashyap@gmail.com

50

PIL 66/2012

su@vsnl.com

CEO of WWF-India based in New
Delhi since 2003. He has been akeen nature conservation worker
since 1976.
He is a long standing member andsince 1994 the Scientific
Officer of the IUCN SSC African
Rhino Specialist Group; and amember of IUCN SSC's Asian Rhino
Specialist Group. He is also a longstanding member of the SADC
Rhino Management Group andSouthern
AfricanRhino
andElephant Security Group/Interpol
Environmental
Crime
Working
Group, and is "a Friend of
Kaziranga".
He
co-authoredmandated joint IUCN/TRAFFIC
reports on Asian and African Rhinos
for the last three CITES COP's andhas been a member of the CITES
Rhino Working Group. In 2012 he
was awarded the Harry MesselAward for Conservation Leadership
by IUCN SSC in recognition of his
scientific leadership and support forrhinoceros conservation in Africa
and Asia, and his long service as
Scientific Officer of the SSC African
Rhino Specialist Group.
He is an wildlife investigator
presently working at Ezemvelo KZN
Wildlife. He is an ex-police official
and experienced trainer in Crime
Scene Management and analysis
for about 30 years in South Africa.
He is a Conservationist andPresident of Conservation Initiative
for the Asian Elephant. Inc.
He is an IFS Officer and wildlife
expert and at present posted as
DIG, NTCA, Govt of India. He is acore member of the think tank of the
NTCA and plays seminal role inshaping the conservation strategies
for India.
He is the DFO, Eastern Assam
Wildlife Division, Bokakaht and the
key stakeholder in the conservationof rhinos at Kaziranga. He is
primarily
responsibleforallinterventions in the Park as DFO.
He is a noted senior journalist with
the Indian Express.
He is an environmental lawyer andpioneer in environmental law
activism in India. He is a counsel in

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 44 of 402

51

Sonali Ghosh IFS

ghoshsonali@gmail.com

52

Sunnydeo I.
Choudhury IFS

Sun4380@gmai.com

53

Susie Elliss.ellies@rhinos.org

54

Valmik Thapar

valmikt@gmail.com

55

Vivek Menon

vivek@wti.org.in

56

Y.V. Jhala

jhalay@wii.gov.in

PIL 66/2012

the Supreme Court of India, andCounsel of certain stakeholders in
the PIL 66/2012
Sonali Ghosh is an Indian Forest
Service Officer of Assam-Meghalaya
cadre of 2000 batch. she has a dual
master's in Wildlife science andForestry, and a PhD degree in
Remote Sensing Technology. Her
areas of specialization include
species distribution modelling andgrassland habitat management. In
her career as a field manager ofmore than 14 years, she has servedin 4 Protected Areas in Assam andis currently serving as Deputy
Director, Manas Tiger Reserve inthe rank of Conservator of Forests.
He is 2011 batch IFS Officer andAsstt. Conservator of Forests,
Kaziranga National Park
She is Executive Director ofInternational
Rhino
Foundation
based in Washington DC. She has
been associated with wildlife
conservation for more than last 25
years
He is a Natural Historian andforemost among Indian Tiger
Conservationist. He is today one ofIndia’s most respected wildlife
expert and conservationist having
produced
andnarrated
documentaries on natural habitats
for such medias like National
Geographic, BBC, Animal Planet,etc.
He is the Executive Director and
CEO of WTI based in Delhi. He is awildlife
conservationist
andenvironmentalist with a passion forelephants and wildlife trade issues.
He is the author of editor of many
best selling books India.
He is a noted wildlife scientist at
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun
and is a noted expert on Tiger. He
has many publications to his credit.

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 45 of 402

CHAPTER 22

HABITAT ISSUES

2.1

Loss of Habitat: Flood and Erosion

Kaziranga is a very very fragile ecosystem at the mercy of the Brahmaputra river and its
underlying forces. A study by J.N. Sharma and S. Acharjee of the Department of Applied
Geology, Dibrugarh University in September, 2012 reveals that “It is very likely that
Kaziranga area has developed due to tectonic causes by the influence of two major
structures. Firstly the Dhansiri lineament diverted the course of the Brahmaputra from its
southerly trend toward northwesterly trend on the east of Kaziranga area along theDhansiri lineament. Secondly the movement along fault in front of Mikir Hills, which trends
nearly E-W, might have caused the area to tilt gradually towards the north. Moreover, theDhansiri lineament develops a scarp with its down thrown block to the NE direction, whichmight be the major cause of diversion of flow of the Dhansiri river from westerly tonorthwesterly direction along the lineament.” They also calculated bank erosion and built
up in the Kaziranga area. According to the same study, “...the Kaziranga National Park isundergoing heavy loss of land, in particular, on the east-north eastern and western sides.”They worked out the loss and gain from 1912 to 2008 in three periods namely 1912-1916
to 1972, 1972 to 1998 and 1998 to 2008. Total area eroded in the fist period (1912-1916 to1972) has been estimated at 84.87 sq km, against which only 24.49 sq km was deposited.
In the second phase from 1972 to 1998, the total area eroded was 44.769 sq km against
accretion of only 29.47 sq km. The total area lost during 1998-2008 was 20.41 sq km,
while only 7.89 sq km was gained. In all the Kaziranga habitat loss was a staggering
figure of 150.04 sq km from 1912-1916 to 2008. The overall gain in habitation was only
61.86 sq km. It has to be noted that the habitat lost is a well established habitat for therhinoceros and other animals, whereas the area gained takes considerable time to cometo a point when it can support large numbers of wildlife population. The loss of the
Kaziranga habitat continues due to floods and erosion.
According to JN Sharma, the loss of habitat is summarized in the Table below:Year/ Period

Area Lost (Sq Km)

Area Gained (Sq Km)

1912-1916 to 1972

84.87

24.49

1972 to 1998

44.70

29.47

1998 to 2008

20.41

7.89

TOTAL

149.9860.85

The habitat loss was also worked out independently from 1914 to 2012 by the author ofthis Report based on Survey of India Topographic Sheets and satellite Images upto 2012.
The summary of findings is given in the Table overleaf:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 46 of 402

1914 to 2012

Year/ Period

Area Lost(Sq Km)83.385

Area Gained(Sq Km)01974 to 2012

48.887

7.44

Remarks
Net Loss only
Further erosion in 2012
and 2013 floods.

The author also took certain fixed points using GPS/ Survey of India Topographic sheets,
and worked out how the bank line of the Brahmaputra river changed from year to year
from 1914 to 2012. It is remarkable to note that the Brahmaputra river has a taken a swingof about 8 km west of Kukrakata RF. Similarly, the river has swung about 3.75 km northsouth at the Gajraj View Point. The Arimora IB Point was about 3 km south of the riverbank in 1914, but gradually, with some swings in between, today lies completely inside
river. Similarly the Debeswari Point, which is the location of the current Anti Poaching
Camp site in Eastern Range, had an interesting north and south swing of 500 m to 2 km
being outside and inside the river over the entire period. Today, the point is just few meters
south of the bank of the river. The current Maklung Ghat point in the Eastern Rangeshows that the river bank line has migrated almost 7.7 km westward taking away prime
area of the Park in course of time from 1914 till 2012.
The image of 2012 pertains to February, 2012. This implies that by 2013, the bank line has
shifted further, and Kaziranga has lost more areas. Erosion has been observed to be also
severe during 2014.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 47 of 402

2.2

Habitat Fragmentation

With the establishment of Tea Gardens, human habitations and agricultural activities on the
periphery of the southern boundary of the park, some of which have been there in thelandscape even prior to establishment of the Park, but now need to be relooked at, it has
now increasingly become difficult for the wild animals to move across to the Hills during highflood season, and the animals fall easy prey to avarice of poachers. Karbi Anglong andKaziranga have always been looked as a single landscape by wildlifers since early times.
However, sporadic, unplanned and mushrooming growth along the NH37 in this part of thecountry has today considerably altered the landscape.
[It also needs to be admitted here that in interaction with the local stakeholders, it wasemphasized by them that in the present situation, allowing the animals to move to hill side to
Karbi Anglong is not safe, as there does not seem to be any protection to the animals
beyond the boundaries of Kaziranga. They also expressed apprehension whether all
animals actually returned or were poached.]On the other hand, due to constant erosion along the northern boundary and accretion in theform of chapories (River Islands), the animals moves to the chapories as these constituteextended natural habitat for wildlife. Moreover, over the years the resident population of
Rhinoceros as well as other mega herbivores i.e. Elephants and wild Buffaloes of Kaziranga
have increased manifold while the landmass of Kaziranga National Park has been reduced
considerably by cut bank erosion of the Brahmaputra. With this background during mid
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 48 of 402

eighties the Government of Assam notified a number of proposed Additions to Kaziranga
National Park in order to secure corridors for migration of wild animals, and escape routes incase of high flooding and for extending the Park by inclusion of the chapories ofBrahmaputra to compensate for loss of park area due to erosion. In total six proposed
Additions have been notified three of which are pending finalization due to legal,
administrative and financial reasons. These addition which is proposed to the KNP would
serve as an extended habitat for the wildlife. According to the recent census it is seen thatthe population of the wildlife has increased exponentially and hence it has become
imperative to add these land mass to the KNP.
[Some of the local stakeholders expressed their anguish as to why the Department was notable to take over the land of the addition areas, and allowed deliberately encroachment totake place.]
2.2.1

NH 37 in Today's Perspective

The NH37 from Jakhlabandha to Bokakhat/ Numaligarh touches upon the southernboundary at certain places especially from Amguri to Panbari. The NH37 has been thelifeline of the people of this region since the days of the Ahom kings. The highways has avery special significance to Kaziranga as well as the local populations. The highway has
been there even prior to declaration of the Kaziranga RF in 1908. Population was thenvery sparse. Today more than 5.00 lakh people reside in these areas. The highway has
become the nerve centre of development leading to opening of shops, markets, road-side
dhabas, hotels, institutions, commercial establishments and residential houses. These
unplanned and uncontrolled activities have today broken down the Karbi Anglong
Kaziranga landscape. There are several important and identified corridors for animal
movement on the NH37 which are used by the animals almost all the time. During theflood season, there is a heavy migration of wild animals from the Kaziranga National Parkto highlands in the Karbi Anglong through these corridors and some other areas along theNH37. It needs to be mentioned that the corridors on the NH37 from Jakhlabandha to
Bokakhat are regularly patrolled by forest personnel of the Kaziranga National Park. The
staff posted on the highway often act as “Traffic Police” by halting traffic on either sidewhenever animals such as elephants and rhinoceros cross the road.
2.2.2

National Green Tribunal and NH37

There has been a case filed in the National Green Tribunal (M.A. No. 687 of 2013, M.A.
No. 1070 of 2013 and M.A. No. 142 of 2014 in O.A. no. 174 of 2013, Rohit Choudhury Vs.
Union of India and Others), the premise of which is that one of the conditions stipulated in
the environmental clearance given by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. ofIndia, New Delhi for setting up of the Numaligarh Refinery was that the NH37 should be
de-notified as a national highway, and secondly that since lot of animals get killed on the
highway during the flood season, the highway ought to be closed forthwith. After hearing
all the parties, the Hon'ble Tribunal has passed a series of orders including short term andlong term measures. The short term measures include methods by which killing of animals
on the highway could be avoided totally. Some of the suggested measures include puttingof rumble strips for speed control, putting cameras and speed guns etc. The long termmeasures include diversion of the highway on the north bank of the river by building
another bridge over the Brahmaputra river near Numaligarh.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 49 of 402

As directed by the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, rumble strips have been put all along
these corridors. However, it is pertinent to mention here that these rumble strips mostly
have been put during the month of November, 2013 i.e. after the floods of 2013. Currently
dry season is running, and floods would be expected anytime after April, 2014. Therefore,
in absence of floods, it is not possible to assess the effectiveness of the methodology. It isduring floods when animals get killed by speeding vehicles. Due to alertness of staff, there
has been no death on the highway so far. [For the orders of the Hon'ble National Green
Tribunal, one can visit http://www.greentribunal.gov.in and search for the case Numbers
given earlier or “Daily orders” giving the dates of hearing such 21-05-2014. All the ordersof the Hon'ble Tribunal can be seen at http://www.greentribunal.gov.in/e-orders.php?
eid=6315]
The National Tiger Conservation Authority vide its Office Memorandum Mo. 12-5/2013NTCA, Dated: 18th December 2013 constituted a committee to review the proposal
submitted by the Government of Assam in compliance of the Order of the Hon’ble NGT to‘Suggest Mitigation Measures in the Interest of Wildlife Conservation w.r.t National
Highway 37. The Committee consisted of Sri D.P. Bankhwal IFS, IGF, Regional Office,
NTCA, Guwahati, Dr. Bilal Habib, and Dr. Gautam Talukdar, Scientists, WII, Dehradun.
From the Govt. of Assam, the members included sri NN deka, Chief Engineer (NH), Sri S.
Bhattacharyya, EE & Nodal Officer, Environment Cell, PWD, and Sri S. Bezbarua, EE (NHDivisoin), Nagaon. The Committee submitted its report to the Ministry in the early part of2014. The Committee argued that speed breakers are not advisable, as they allow
vehicles to be more time on the road, leading to greater risk of accidents. The Committee
proposed a series of fly-overs on the NH37.
As the Govt. of Assam has already filed affidavits in this regard, the opinions expressed
here are that of the author, and in no way reflect the opinion of the Govt. of Assam or theForest Department. The opinion of the author has been mentioned here mainly as an
academic exercise.
According to the author, the method of speed breakers/ rumble strips does not appear tobe scientific in helping the animals cross, as the vehicles now spend more time on theroad; and given the increasing volume of traffic, and, therefore, these vehicles virtually
make an impregnable wall, due to their proximity and sheer noise levels, which theanimals hesitate to cross. This has resulted, on the other hand, to confinement of big
animals such as elephants, who have almost become resident in the Park this year.
Further the screeching noise caused by speeding vehicles over the rumble strips areheard very far within the National Park boundaries, especially the noise of loaded trucks,
that it would frighten any animal and prevent it from crossing the road. Therefore, therumble strips should be removed. The State Govt. has already placed Interceptor vehicles
in this stretch to apprehend and bring to book speeding vehicles.
It must be understood in clear terms that holding back such a large population of resident
large mammals such as elephants is fraught with danger, on one hand, as the habitat isbeing destroyed (meaning its directly threatening the survival of the Greater One Horned
Rhinoceros, of which Kaziranga holds the largest population in the world, and on the other
hand, as scarcity of elephant food availability is getting acute, there is sharp rise in deathof wild elephants in the Park, mainly due to “parasite overload”. The confinement of large
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 50 of 402

mammals have been further aggravated by putting up solar power fencing by the Park
authorities to secure the life, property and crop of the fringe village populations. Further
due to rampant construction activities along both sides of the NH-37 from Jakhlabandha to
Bokakhat, the corridors are virtually getting blocked for good, leading to confinement oflarge mammals. It is no denying that confinement of large mammals in the Park round theyear is very very dangerous to the survival of these mammals, and they must be allowed
to move to the Karbi Anglong hills without fear or threat.
Therefore, it is submitted that rumble strips are no solution to the problem at hand, andhence, must be removed. It is suggested that “Wild animal Traffic Light” pairs be put at
each of the identified points on the NH-37, and be manned on 24X7 basis in 3 8-hourly
shifts. These traffic lights would also hold the cameras for speed monitoring andoverloading. “Green” light would mean, no animals in sight on either side of the road, andtraffic can move as usual. “Amber” would mean, animals approaching; and may cross; soonly emergency vehicles may pass such as ambulances. “Red” light would mean animals
about to cross/ crossing, so no traffic to move between the light posts on either side of thecorridor. Further, heavy penalty be levied on those jumping the “amber” and “red” lights.
Further, entire corridor shall be “No Horn” zone. This would ensure that animal crossingsare not only safe, but also the animals have the “First Right of Way”. These posts would
also be used for automated traffic volume/ number counts, checking of pollution levels,
emissions of all the vehicles passing through the corridors. Or alternately instead of traffic
lights, gantry structures could be set up at appropriate places with camera on top for 24X7
monitoring and stationing of staff in shifts with communication equipment to ensure safe
crossing of animals.
The wildlife traffic light system, in a slightly advanced and automated form has been
operational in several parts of the world by the name of “Roadside Animal Detection
System”, noted among them being the Preaching Canyon cross-wails for the elks. The
system consists of thermal scanners with military grade target acquisition software that is“trained” to detect wildlife, but “miss” small animals such as rabbits. Depending upon thestatus of detection, it displays different messages including silhouette of an elk when theelk comes on road, along with a message “Elk Crossing”. The system operates on a 24X7
basis. The proposed traffic lights can also be automated in a similar way using thermalscanners and target acquisition software.
The fine could be at least 10 times the fines for traffic violations in urban / metropolis
areas; and the all the amount collected would be deposited in the account of the“Kaziranga Tiger Conservation Foundation”.
Construction of Underpasses & Overpasses on NH37:
The Expert Committee has suggested construction of specially designed fly overs along
the corridors. The total length would be about 25 km including the approach road on a totalroad length of about 52 km. The proposed structures would be pre-fabricated, and would
take minimum time to build and commission. It is expected that once these fly overs arethrough, there would be no road kill of wild animals. The estimated cost is about Rs. 2000
crore.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 51 of 402

The only issue here is that the most of the corridors are blocked, and construction of
flyovers would just solve only one of the problems, i.e. crossing of the road by the wild
animals. However, the other vital question i.e. whether animals are in a position to reachthe highway, and if they reached and crossed, are they in a position to secure their way tothe other side. This question is being raised here as because, development and growth
are a continuous process, and in course of time, there would be more and moreconstruction, thereby, blocking the passage of the animals for good, despite the flyovers.
Therefore, along with the flyovers, one has to adopt a clear cut policy of “Corridor
Retrofitting”, especially the areas under the flyover and their connects to Kaziranga andKarbi Anglong Hills. All obstacle would have to be removed, if necessary by removing
existing construction, buying of land, including tea garden lands at market prices,
relocating buildings etc. [While interacting with certain local stakeholders, it was apparent
that in certain areas, such retro-fitting would be possible, especially Amguri, Deosur,
Kanchanjuri, Sildubi and Haldibari. It may be difficult in Hatikhuli and Panbari as these arevery old habitations][It needs to be mentioned here that if the Bagser RF is taken into the Kaziranga National
Park/ Tiger Reserve management fold, it would require creation of three new corridors,
one of which Amguri (appears to have been taken care by the Expert Committee), but two
more, for which we may have to buy parts of Amguri Tea estate and some private lands,(and these are areas where rhino crossing is very high all the time, and our current
strategy to chase them back. Elephants also create havoc frequently during cropping
times), one opposite Kathalcham camp and one opposite Rangalu Camp. If so, then we
may need two additional fly-overs. This would also need, surely a road skirting the Bagser
RF from behind, for keeping the poachers at bay.]
In the personal opinion of the author, further, if the NH37 is allowed to be the way it is now,i.e. the only life-line and means of connectivity between the lower and upper Assam, thevolume of traffic would increase many fold in future. Since the conditions of the MoEF
which were imposed while giving environmental clearance of the Numaligarh Refinery
stipulate that the section of the NH37 between Jakhlabandha and Bokakhat to be
denotified, a work around must be thought today for a what if scenario in 2050 AD andbeyond.
Assam Needs Ultra Modern Highways and Railways:
The author is of the opinion that the State of Assam, unlike most of the mainland states of
the country, has a very poor network of highways, largely because of the linearity of terrainoffered naturally by the typical sections of elongated valleys and hill segments totally
dominated by the river Brahmaputra. Building more highways with ultra modern
technologies which are eco-friendly, green and least damaging to the forests and wildlife,
is in the interest of the State, for its future economic growth and prosperity of the State.
While preserving the delicate ecosystem called Kaziranga is of utmost importance, thecurrent trends of development around the present NH-37 would make it an island in thesea of concrete and ensure that the rhinoceros become extinct in future (Mathur VB, WII).
Therefore, the current NH-37 from Jakhlabandha to Numaligarh should be stopped frombecoming the “only life-line” and connectivity between the “Lower” and “Upper” Assam.
Instead, modernization of the NH37 in its present state (with possible diversion at places
within 500m south of it) to an elevated 4 lane expressway, allowing the existing alignment
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 52 of 402

to be used as highland for animal as well as for local movement of traffic; and two 4 lane
diversions, one on the north (which is already in active consideration of the Govt.), andone additional on the south through the Karbi Anglong may also be explored. [ Of course,
Kaziranga needs highlands, and NH37 can be strengthened for this sake alone.]
Diversion from Kaliabor would take the Tezpur route, and then join over to Numaligarh bycrossing a new bridge over the Brahmaputra. The PWD (NH) has already submitted the
proposal for such a bridge over the river Brahmaputra near Numaligarh, having a span of
10.00 km meters and costing Rs. 2750 cr. Heavy traffic, could then, follow this route.
Secondly, building an ultra modern elevated expressway from Jakhlabandha to Bokakhat
just by the southern side of the NH37, with some diversions here and there, along with anelevated single loopline light rail, on the lines of metro, are the kind of projects/
communication system that ought to be put in place in this part of Assam. Though thesuggestion may look unnecessary and high costing, given the least scope of developmentin the surrounding of Kaziranga, this would open a very fast means of communication with
Guwahati/ Nagaon on the west and Jorhat/Dibrugarh on the east and Tezpur on the north,enabling better economic opportunities for the local population on the fringes of Kaziranga
who deserve, in the opinion of the author, the best possible development alternatives
possible in the world, as Kaziranga is one of its kind of habitat in the world, and it the local
population that would play the key role in future in answering whether Kaziranga would
celebrate its bicentenary in 2105 AD. To my mind, cost cannot be a consideration while
securing the future of Kaziranga and deciding the fate of the fringe population of this world
heritage site.
NH37 As a Highland:
As explained in the Chapter on Rhino Population Dynamics, there has been 162 “reported
deaths” of rhinos due to floods alone from 1982 till date. Death of other animals due tofloods is also very high. One one hand, there is so much concern and public outcry against
poaching and road kill, on the other hand, the main killer namely floods do not seem to bein picture at all. Kaziranga needs a large number of well designed highlands inside and on
the periphery where animals can take shelter during floods. NH37 is an excellent highland.
The strongest argument to make it a 6-10 lane highland, what to speak of 4 lane, is that
NH37 has a lot of potential to save the animals during floods. If the highway is broadened
beyond 4-lane to 6-10 lane, rest of the width can be used by the animals during floods.
However, its an irony that NH37 is doomed to die due to a historical mistake and wildlife
activism over-zeal which misunderstands “development” and conservation paradigm.
2.2.3

Fragmentation of Corridors

Though there are recognized six numbers of corridors, they have been further broken
down into smaller units here for better understanding of the land use and issues on thecorridor. The WWF has very recently prepared a detailed report on the animal corridors of
Kaziranga in 2014. The report was based on camera traps results of animal movement.
Findings of the report also corroborate mostly the facts and issues mentioned below here.
Amguri Corridor: This has been a very important elephant corridor in the past, but now
rendered defunct by human activity. The connect between Bagser RF and Kukrakata RF is

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 53 of 402

lost due to construction of a series of hotels and dhabas right next to the highway. A
proposal may be moved to remove the dhabas and hotels from this corridor.
Ghorakati Corridor: A corridor between 1 st Addition and the Chirang Hill, mostly used byelephants. Now stands blocked by the Assam Tourism and GL Resorts. As per records the
Chirang Hill (otherwise known as Burapahar) was proposed for reservation as RF in 1979.
The entire hill should be resurveyed and made a part of Kaziranga
Deosur Corridor: A very active corridor for all animals especially during floods. Now fully
encroached and agricultural activities in full swing What was a bunch of huts in 1990s, is
now today a settled hamlet with shops and electricity connection Part of the area along theNH37 from the bridge upto Palkhowa seems to be under Bagser RF. Needs urgent eviction(at least the RF part of the area), and the rest of the area must be brought under a“Purchase Plan”).
Malani-Burapahar Corridor: This beautiful corridor starts from Maloni Anti Poaching
Camp and runs upto the Burapahar Beat Office (which is the old limit of Kaziranga andfrom where the 1st Addition areas start). It faces the Burapahar Tea Garden immediately on
the other side of the highway. The Tea Garden authorities have fenced up the area withbarbed wire, rendering the corridor fruitless in places. There are three Tea gardens in thearea namely Burapahar TE, Jagdamba TE and Sag Motee TE. These three gardens may
be proposed for immediate purchase at market rates.
Kanchanjuri Corridor: This is a vital corridor where to the south the 4 th Addition to KNP is
located. The corridor starts from the bridge over Deopani river on NH37 and ends on thewest to the end of the 4 th Addition area. The corridor, barring the 4 th Addition area, iscompletely fragmented on the south of NH37.
Harmoti Corridor: This once was a very active corridor. However, due to several
construction/ buildings on the south of NH37 on Karbi Anglong side, it is now almost
abandoned by wild animals.
Sildubi Corridor: This is the area comprising of the proposed 5 th Addition and the south of
NH37. The 5th Addition areas were encroached as late as 2013 by making makeshift
camps by certain motivated groups. On the south there is extensive Jhumming. This also
the northern part of the proposed North Karbi Anglong Wildlife Sanctuary. Of late Hotels
and habitation have come up to the south of the NH37.

Haldibari Corridor: Currently this is one of the two functional and largely undisturbed
corridors. To the north of the NH37 and eastward lies the part of the proposed 2 nd Addition
to KNP, which so far has not been handed over to Forest Department. To the east of theCorridor is Hatikhuli TE, part of which may be purchased at market rates to make thecorridor more robust.
Panbari Corridor: This corridor is the second corridor and only one existing today for wild
animals on the eastern side of the Park and measures about 4.30 km in length along theNH37. North side of the corridor, excepting the 3 rd Addition areas (measuring 900 m in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 54 of 402

length along the NH37), are quite thickly inhabited. On the south side, its broken at several
places with Tea gardens and human inhabitation. Between the Kaziranga National Park,and Panbari, there is thick habitation upto 500-800 m on the north of NH37, barring the
proposed 3rd Addition to KNP. Methoni TE, its factory and labour lines break the corridor atdifferent points. The Tea Garden areas falling between the Panbari RF and the NH37, andthose falling to the north of the RF may be proposed for purchase at market rates. Since
Panbari is the last corridor on the eastern side providing safe passage to wild animals of
the Eastern and central ranges, this corridor needs a very special retrofitting attention.
2.2.4

Barrier Effect

The NH-37 which runs on the south of the Kaziranga National Park, has of late, become azone of mushrooming developmental activities such as hotels, dhabas, shops andcommercial space for use of the local population as well as the tourists coming from theoutside. The traffic on the highway has also increased many fold. There are several identified
corridors for animal movement, which have become almost dis-functional due toanthropogenic activities. Further, several of the villages have demanded installation of power
fencing along the Park boundaries. This has also led to restriction in the movement of thelarge mammals such as the rhinoceros, elephants, buffalo, tigers, leopards and deer species.
This has led to confinement of the large mammals inside the Park for longer durations further
leading to destruction of the habitat, especially the tall grasses.
2.3

Satellite Imagery Evidence of the Corridor Fragmentation

Map showing Settlements around NH37 in 1987 and 2008, It is clear that there is no way the
animals can move anywhere. The situation would be more alarming now. The imageries[Courtesy: Bibhab Talukdar] clearly show that animals from the Park would find it difficult tomove to Karbi Anglong. Look at the less and less of “Yellow” in the second images. How
agriculture is being converted to commercial and constructions, is very much evident fromthe two images.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 55 of 402

2.3.1Conservation vs Development Paradox

After 100 years of successful conservation history, Kaziranga seems to have reached thepoint of the classical debate, as to how much development is to be allowed and how muchspace for conservation. The questions that one needs to answer today are:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 56 of 402

1. Should the Rhino population in Kaziranga be managed at 2500 levels for all times
to come now?
2. If so, what would happen to about 100-125 fresh additions that happen each year?
Where are such safe and productive areas in Assam or in India or abroad where
new populations can be translocated?
3. If no, then where from we make available additional areas which may range from1000-2000 sq km for the population to reach about 3500+ levels?
Question No.

AnswerConservation

Development

1

YES

Low Priority

High Priority

2

Don't Know

Low Priority

High Priority

3

Don't Know

Low Priority

High Priority

It is clear from the above matrix that conservation is not possible, if we do not know theanswers to Question No. 2 and 3. The Question 1 would again arise once we achieve the3500 population levels, and so on and so forth.
The other two scenarios are also depicted here:
Question No.

AnswerConservation

1

YES

Low Priority

2

Yes, we have secure Balanced
habitats
elsewhere
already identified

3

Does not arise

Development
High Priority
Balanced

In the above scenario, there is already identified habitats elsewhere which would fully
support another population if certain numbers of “gains” in rhino each year are “removed”
from the mother habitat and translocated to the new destinations, allowing good growth inoriginal habitat, without extending the area.
Question No.

AnswerConservation

Development

1

NOHigh Priority

Must be balanced

2

Are in process of High Priority
securing other areas

Must be balanced

3

Extension of habitat High Priority
is required to beundertaken

Must be balanced[As a conscious society and responsible citizens of Assam, we all feel the pain andanguish, and express our deep concern, even anger at the poaching of every single rhinoin Kaziranga National Park. Having said that let us assume a scenario, which would surely
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 57 of 402

materialize shortly and would continue to hold true for long hopefully, where the rhino
poaching stopped totally. Given the current confines of the animal and the biologicalcarrying capacity of the Kaziranga National Park, say the net gain of 35 rhinos every year,
if not removed to other secure locations, would mean the net gain would slowly decrease,say it may become 30 followed by 25, followed by 20 and so on and so forth. Now thequestion is “Due to our inability as a conscious society to give more space to therhinoceros, especially when human needs dominate every thing else on this planet,
and we have surely hijacked it from the possession of other species, are we notequally responsible and guilty of a crime as heinous as rhino poaching, as ourinaction is directly responsible for loss of rhinos, as because a rhino lost is a rhino
lost for ever whether due to poaching or not having been born due to biotic
constraints of habitat loss and degradation?”.]In this scenario, which is actually desirable, extension of the original habitat is undertaken
so that the original population can grow further for few decades. Thereafter, one can starttranslocating “gains” to new areas to establish more populations.
In case of Assam, we need to to do both i.e. undertake identifying and securing new areas/
habitats, and at the same time undertake an enterprise to extend the existing habitat toallow more space for growth till the new areas are fully ready to accept “gains”.
Therefore, it is high time that we develop a long term Assam Rhino Range Expansion
Program which addresses these issues right at the very beginning. In Assam, land is
scarce and highly competed for. People have a propensity to occupy government land andoccupy it for housing or agriculture in the hope that sometime down the line the same
would be regularized. In Kaziranga already this fierce competition can be witnessed. Local
populations must be taken into confidence, before further expansion of area is thought of.
It is also true that if adequate space for development and growth opportunities to the local
and fringe populations is not provided, conservation would be difficult to achieve.
Kaziranga today presents a typical case in this regard. On one hand, due to No
Development Zone (NDZ) declared around 15 km of Numaligarh, industrial andentrepreneurial activities would come to halt. On declaration of Eco Sensitive Zone (ESZ),
there would be further brake on development activities. The problem could become acute,as there is a very narrow stretch of land between Kaziranga and Karbi Anglong for growthand expansion of economic activities. Due to reasons that there are several Reserved
Forests and wildlife sanctuaries in North Karbi Anglong, even these areas would become
ESZ in times to come. Therefore, one needs to find out new opportunities, employment
avenues and economic growth models for these populations.
There is no doubt that development of the region surrounding Kaziranga merits further
attention and in depth study.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 58 of 402

2.4

Degradation of Habitat

The habitat of the Kaziranga National Park is undergoing a slow degradation process under
the influence of various biotic and abiotic pressures. Some of these are briefly described
below:
2.4.1

Invasive Weeds:

The Mimosa invisa species was imported from the South-east Asian countries by the tea
gardens on the periphery of the Kaziranga National Park to suppress the Imperata cylindrica
in the prospective tea garden areas meant for expansion and also to supplement nitrogen
fixation in the degraded soils. As all the water channels in the surrounding gardens run into
the Park, the seeds of Mimosa spp entered the Park, and invaded the grasslands. So far
about 170 Hectares of tall grass land is affected by the invasive weeds. This is destroying
the prime habitat of the rhinoceros. Due to its thick growth and thorny growth, animals
cannot move through the mimosa vegetation, leading to blocking animal movements inside
the Park. As no chemicals can be applied inside the Park, only manual methods of physicaluprooting is resorted to. Its not only costly but also time consuming.
[Comments from Richard Emslie: Agree - Aliens are a costly problem and can significantly
affect habitats for rhino. WHY? Everything is made of "chemicals". Need to put things into
perspective. What is better - good habitat lost to aliens or effective clearing and retreatmentof aliens to secure areas of good habitat. Why not consider changing your rules to allow theuse of biodegradable herbisides that breakdown quickly and don't have a long term residual
effect?]Next to Mimosa invisa, a wild Rosa is one of the most trouble giving weeds – moreparticularly in the moist grazing lands. Large thickets of this thorny straggling shrub has
made passing through impossible even for large animals like elephants, buffalos andrhinoceros. The effect of increasing population of this wild rose has basically damaged theswamplands, reduced drastically the diversity of other plant species, destroyed habitats andgrazing areas of animals and several birds.
It is to be noted that the Kenyan Act on wildlife, as discussed in Chapter 5, provides for andrecognizes “invasive species”, and its introduction in a wildlife conservation area is anoffence leading to fine and imprisonment or both.
It is suggested all the tea gardens surrounding the Kaziranga National Park must bepurchased at market rates, and made a part of the Park. A tea garden would typically costanything from 7 crore to 25 crore only. There are about 10 gardens surrounding the Park.
The total cost, including a very very handsome rehabilitation package for the tea garden
labourers should not cost the Govt more than 400-500 crores. This is an investment worth
making to secure the future of the rhinoceros and the Kaziranga. However, it is easily said
than done. It has been discussed in some more details in Part II of the Report.
[Comments of Richard Emslie: EXCELLENT PLAN as presumably this would help securesome corridor routes into the higher areas during floods. Perhaps there are opportunities
for peripheral tourist developments at the edge of such areas that can hopefully provide
some jobs for local communities.] It must be mentioned, and as further elucidated in Chapter
5, the Kenya has a special provision in its wildlife regulation for conflicting punishment on
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 59 of 402

whose who are found responsible for invasive weed injection in conservation areas. It would
also not be out of place to mention here that the problem of invasive weeds is so extreme in
US Forests that the US Fish and Wildlife Service maintains special station on the border ofthe conservation areas, where the vehicles entering and leaving are sanitized for invasive
weeds.
2.4.2

Siltation of the Water Bodies

Kaziranga is very rich in water bodies, locally called as Beels. The water-bodies form about
5.96% of the total Park area. There are 92 perennial water bodies and more than 250
seasonal water bodies. The Brahmaputra carries a lot of silt load every year, which gets
deposited, reducing the effective area of the water bodies. These water bodies play
important ecological roles such as:••••Important breeding ground and nurseries for numerous Fish population.
Prime habitat for most endangered species Rhinoceros unicornis.
Harbour Swamp deer, Asiatic Wild buffalo, elephants etc.
Act as roosting and nesting ground for migratory and indigenous water birds.

This unique wetland eco-system is confronted with numerous of problems such as
shrinkage in size and depth of the water bodies due to deposition of heavy silt carried
in by the Bramaputra and its tributaries and choking of water bodies by water hyacinths.
Almost all water bodies are connected through channels/nullahs. These may described asarteries and veins of Kaziranga. Desiltation/ clearance of water channels is of paramountimportance to maintain and restore ecological systems.
2.4.3

Shrinking of Grasslands

In several parts of Central Range, Western Range, Burapahar Range and Eastern Range,
there has been mass regeneration of Simul (Bombax Ceiba) which is encroaching upon
the grasslands and destroying the habitat. Attempts have been made in the past in someof the ranges to manually cut down Simul trees by engaging labour. It has been observedthat Simul is coming back prolifically through natural regeneration of seeds scattered all
across the grassland, as well as coppice from the cut trees.
Similarly wild rose is also spreading in several areas, especially in areas which seem tobe overgrazed.
2.4.4

Overgrazing

Kaziranga National park has only 3% of area covered with palatable short grasses. Out of
this 1440 ha area is clearly in disturbed state due to overgrazing by wild buffalo/feral
buffalo live stock as well as wild herbivores. This poses many fold problem for
management like competition for palatable grasses and spread of diseases from live stock
to wild animals. During February – March, when fodder becomes scarce for the
livestock because of prevailing dry weather the villagers often push their livestock into
the P a r k area for grazing. Annual burning during the period also results in thegrowth of new shoot and the livestock relish such vegetation. Besides, competing for
fodder with wildlife, such intrusion increases the risk of spread of epidemic as the
livestock are not always properly immunized. Grazing of domestic livestock should be
prevented by effective enforcement by the staff and through EDC activities.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 60 of 402

If one looks at rhino as flagship species, then wild buffalo and elephants can be attributed toalso considerably cause overgrazing and damaging valuable rhino habitat in the interior of
the Park. Several areas have been reduce to short grasses by overgrazing by wild buffalo
and feral buffaloes.
2.4.5

Water Scarcity

Water scarcity is a new issue which may come up in a big way in the times to come. This
year during march, April, 2014 it was observed that virtually drought like conditions prevailed
in the Park. Currently there is no mechanism to hold water inside the Park after the floods
recede. For future, the planning is experiment with causeways with good foundation which
can withstand the force of incoming flood waters, that may be in a position to retain somewater in the Park for longer periods.
2.5

Migration of Wild Animals

Kaziranga is biologically a very productive habitat, and acts as source for the surrounding
landscape. Despite fragmented corridors, considerable migrations still happen due to theislands of the Brahmaputra river. WWF is preparing a comprehensive report on the islandsof the river in the Kaziranga landscape to study the migration pattern and routes taken by
the wild animals using camera traps. The report is likely to be out shortly. Meanwhile GPS
recordings of various spotting of rhinoceros in the riverine areas between Kaliabhomora
bridge and Laokhowa-Burachapori WLS for several years show that rhinoceros have been
regularly moving to and fro in the landscape.
Given the high risks of poaching, efforts are made by the Park authorities to drive back therhino if it crosses the boundaries of the Park and information is received. Once the entire
corridor is secured, and the whole of the 6 th Addition is made safe for the rhinos to strayand move on, and the Laokhowa and Burachapori are made fully secure, there may not be
any need of any translocation of these animals. It is, however, to be seen how much time
would it take to secure the territories of the rhinoceros in the Kaziranga landscape.
2.6

Conclusions

The following conclusions are being drawn based on the facts and analysis presented
above:
1. Kaziranga National Park has already lost a net land area of 83.385 sq km to erosion
by the Brahmaputra river.
2. The bank line of the river Brahmaputra is shifting westward in the Eastern Range,and southward all along the southern bank line from Eastern Range to Western
Range.
3. The habitat in Kaziranga National Park is getting fragmented, especially the
corridors connecting to the Karbi Anglong hills; and may be permanently lost, if
steps for restoration are not taken now.
4. The NH37 needs a very special and multi pronged strategy, though the cost
involved could be very high.
5. Though Ecological Carrying Capacity (ECC) exercise has not been carried out,
indications are clear that Kaziranga National Park is reaching its ECC limits in ashort span of time. This would mean that either one needs to translocate rhinos out
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 61 of 402

of the park to other safe areas, or expand the area of the Park to increase the ECC
limit. If none of the two are done, rhinos run the risk of being lost.
6. A rhino lost is a rhino lost for ever, whether due to poaching or a rhino not having
been born due to biotic constraints of habitat loss or degradation.
7. The habitat of Kaziranga National Park is degrading gradually due to invasive
weeds, siltation of water-bodies, shrinking of grass-lands, overgrazing due todomestic livestock as well as other larger mammals such as elephants and wild
buffaloes. There are also possibilities of water scarcity in future, if appropriate
measures are not taken.
8. Animals such as rhinos migrate from Kaziranga to near by areas from Majuli toOrang. Every effort must be made to secure and manage the corridors.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 62 of 402

CHAPTER 3
3

The Existing Protection Framework of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve

This Chapter deals with in brief the front line staff and Park logistics that exists as of now
for the protection of Kaziranga. It is to be mentioned here that Kaziranga as a word isbeing used to represent several entities. Firstly, Kaziranga is Kaziranga National Park with
its notified areas and Additions to the Kaziranga National Park, administered by theDivisional Forest Officer, Eastern Assam Wildlife Division, Bokakhat. The next immediateauthority vested with powers for Park management is the Director, Kaziranga National
Park. Secondly, the other legal entity is the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve notified in 2007 under
the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The Kaziranga Tiger Reserve (KTR) comprises of the
Kaziranga National Park, all the Additions of the Kaziranga National Park, Kukrakata RF
and Panbari RF (all of which is in control of the DFO, EAWL); and the Burachapori and
Laokhowa wildlife sanctuaries falling under the jurisdiction of the Divisional Forest Officer,
Nagaon Wildlife Division, Nagaon. Kaziranga Tiger Reserve has a notified area of 1100 sq
km, as against only 884.44 sq km of the Kaziranga National Park. The territorial jurisdiction
over the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve is exercised by the Filed Director (who is the same
person as the Director) through the two DFOs namely DFO, EAWL and DFO, Nagaon
Wildlife Division. The report often talks of Park/ Tiger Reserve.
There are certain aspects which are only applicable for the Park, and certain other to thePark/ Tiger Reserve. The Report mostly confines itself to the issues pertaining to the Park.
Nevertheless, wherever it is felt that Park/ Tiger Reserve must be taken account, it has
been done so. Especially, the new management/ technology inputs shall be naturally
extended to the whole of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, as the entire area has originallybeen rhino bearing, and potential of rhino residency outside the Park and within the Tiger
Reserve is very high. The short term goal should be to secure the entire Tiger Reserveand ensure that the rhinos are safe anywhere within the limits of the Tiger Reserve. Having
said that, the infrastructure and support system of Nagaon Wildlife Division is very small,as of now. A brief description about this division has been included at the end of this
Chapter.
In the proposed Kaziranga Landscape, as in Part II of the Report, the area of Kaziranga
would get further extended by another 300-400 sq km along the Brahmaputra river. It is
proposed to include Orang National Park also into the fold of the landscape, which alreadyhas 105 rhinos over an area of 78.91 sq km. The per capita land availability in Orang
comes to 0.75 sq km, which is more than 3 times that of Kaziranga National Park. Orang
seems to have the ideal population of rhinos in Assam.
The final goal would be to secure fully the entire landscape so that the rhino can roam
freely and without any threat of poaching from west of Majuli to Orang.
3.1

The Sentinels of Kaziranga

The Kaziranga National Park has a sanctioned strength of 506 front line staff including
Deputy Rangers, Forester Grade I, Forest Guard, Game Watcher, Mahut, Grass Cutter andBoatman. There are about 450 men in position. They are the sentinels of the Park who havesuccessfully charted the course of one of the most exemplary case of conservation of theGreater One Horned Rhinoceros virtually from the brink of extinction. However, all is not well
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 63 of 402

with the sentinels of Kaziranga. They are one of the most neglected lot. Its sheer love ofwildlife and Kaziranga that keeps them going and they continue fighting and protecting therhinoceros and other wildlife despite several odds. As many as 100 staff have lost their lives
or received grave injuries while on duty. The staff is ill equipped and lacks modern gadgets.
They have to constantly fight two enemies, one without i.e. the poachers; and one within, i.e.
the wildlife that they are protecting. Therefore, the task of a guard in Kaziranga is manytimes more challenging than that of security forces. The front-line staff is mostly armed with .
303, .315 guns.
3.1.1

Staff Strength

The snapshot of staff strength from 1957 to 2001 can be seen in the table below. Kaziranga
has grown from single strength in 1957 to 562 in 2001.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 64 of 402

Sl
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

Category of Post
DCF
FVO
WLRO
ACF
FR
Dy.R/G.Keeper
Forester-I
Forester-II
Hd G.Watcher
Forest Guard
Game Watcher
T.Driver
Driver
M.L.Driver
Head Mahut
Mahut
Grass cutter
BoatmanHead AssttAccountant
Sr Asstt
Jr Asstt
St Asstt
Peon
Chowkidar
Mali
Khansama
Paniwalla
Handiman
Vety F. AssttRadio Techn
Electrician
Sweeper
TOTAL
Cumulative

STATEMENT SHOWING NUMBERS AND YEARWISE CREATION OF POSTS UNDER EASTERN ASSAMWILDLIFE DIVISION BOKAKHATYEAR OF CREATION OF POSTS
Total from1957 1959 1963 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1995 2000 2001 2001 onwards
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
2
.
6
2
1
2
4
1
10
3
2
2
1
4
1
3
27
2
45
1
18
19
2
3
5
10
2
8
37
8
6
133
8
212
10
12
8
2
12
12
2
58
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
5
3
15
1
4
1
6
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
8
9
8
34
1
1
5
1
1
8
9
8
34
4
7
13
9
4
20
6
63
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
3
1
3
1
8
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
7
1
1
4
2
3
11
2
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
4
1
26
17
1
20
1
19
14
16
1
1
2
26 63
1
64
22
9
20 208
3
1
19
2
562
5
6
32
49
50
70 71
90 104 120 121 122 124 150 213 214 278 300 309 329 538 541 542 560 562

Major jumps in staff strength happened in 1966, followed by 1969-1974, 1978-1979, and1987. In 1987 the staff strength was 538, and by 2001 it became 562, a marginal increase. If
one looks at history, originally the Park had three ranges namely Eastern Range with its HQ
at Agaratoli, Central Range with its HQ at Kohora and the Western Range with its HQ at
Bagori. In the year 1990, the 1st Addition area was constituted into Burapahar Range with
its HQ at Ghorakati. Kukrakata RF was brought to the park in 2002 under the Burapahar
Range. Northern Range was established in 2010 to provide protection to the riverine areasof the Brahmaputra river, in principle covering all the 6th Addition areas to the National Park.
Therefore, it can be said that sanctioned strength did not increase meaningfully after 1987,
whereas the areas to be patrolled effectively doubled from 430 sq km to 884 sq km.
The Government of Assam spends about Rs. 13.65 crore annually on salary and allied
expenditure for protection of the Park. However, there are two key issues being faced in
respect of manpower. Firstly, of the total sanctioned strength, the man in harness is only
465/562 as of now, indicating an occupancy of 82% and 18% vacancies. Secondly, as of
now 41 nos of manpower are such that they are physically incapable of performing
protection duties in Kaziranga. This population is about 7% of the deployed staff strength.
The main reason being that staff sustains injuries while on duty either in counter attack frompoachers or in attack by wild animals.
3.1.2

The Assam Forest Protection Force

Though all the front line staff of the Park are mostly armed, and the Govt. of Assam hasenabled use of fire-arms by forest staff, the fire power is limited. To overcome this, theForest Department constituted the Assam Forest Protection Force in 1984 by raising the 1 st
Battalion of AFPF. In 2007, the 2nd Battalion was raised. The Department is in the process of
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 65 of 402

raising the 3rd Battalion as well. Of the two Battalions, the Kaziranga has got about 430 no of
personnel deployed along with the front-line staff. Most of the personnel are armed with .303
rifles. However, now a good number of SLRs and carbines have been inducted. The
department is in the process of acquiring AK series rifles as well to match the fire power ofthe poachers who often have been found to use a mix of .303 with silencer and AK 47/ 56
rifles among other weapons. The actual strength deployed varies from time to time.
An additional manpower strength of about 70 personnel was deployed on 2nd May, 2014 witha reserve of 30 personnel at Secconee, the HQ of the 2nd Battalion. It is to be mentioned that
AFPF personnel also sustain injuries while on duty. However, the advantage here is that all
such persons are retrenched to the HQ and replacement is provided in most of the cases.
3.1.3

Home Guards

Despite deploying front-line staff and AFPF, there is still serious shortage of staff to securealmost 1000 sq. km of thickly forested area with a very high animal population. Therefore,
the Park authorities also deploy considerable number of armed Home Guards. The
deployment of home guards was started in 1986. Till march, 2014 there were 129 nos ofArmed Home Guards deployed in the Park. The current deployment is only 117. The actual
strength deployed varies from time to time.
3.1.4

Participatory Protection

In order to bridge the gap between the front-line staff and the population living on the fringesof the Park, a strategy to deploy local manpower from these villages as casual workers, field
informants and camp boys is adopted. These boys work in close coordination with the frontline staff. Several of the local boys have been trained as Tourist Guides. The Tourist Guides
take the tourists inside the Park during visiting hours and thereafter carry out protection duty
along with the front-line staff. As of now a total of 163 nos of casual workers and 25 numbersof tourists guides have been deployed. Additionally to guard the areas outside the Park frompotential intruders and also to keep watch on large mammals crossing over to the humanhabitations and tea gardens, Village Defence Parties (VDP) of a group of 7-10 youth areorganized in some of the villages. They are given basic facilities such as torches, batteries,
extra kerosene oil, crackers etc. to keep watch and ward during the night time on the fringeof the Park. During the flood season, volunteers are recruited from the villages along theNH37 to guard the highway so that there are no casualties happen on the road. They also
keep a watch on the straying rhinoceros. Number of such volunteers cross 100 during peakfloods. Additionally, staff from neighbouring divisions are also deployed for flood duty
temporarily for a period of three to six months. This time it is proposed to keep thevolunteers for a longer duration beyond flood in order to secure the porous border of the
Park/ Tiger Reserve.
3.1.5

Present Administrative Set Up and Anti Poaching Infrastructure

The Kaziranga National Park was declared in 2007 a Tiger Reserve, known as Kaziranga
Tiger Reserve (KTR). The Director of the park has been notified additionally as Field
Director, and the DFO, Eastern Assam Wildlife Division as Deputy Field Director, KTR. As
per the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, a foundation in the name and style of Kaziranga
Tiger Conservation Foundation (KTCF) have been formed in 2007. All the tourists earningand other proceeds go to this foundation.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 66 of 402

The Director/ Field Director has the overall superintendence and control over the
management of the Park/ Tiger Reserve. He is assisted by a Conservator of Forests (CF)and one Divisional Forest Officer, Eastern Assam Wildlife Division, also known as Deputy
Field Director, KTR, who implements the management decisions. The DFO, in turn, is
assisted by two Assistant Conservator of Forests, and Range Forest Officers who are in
charge of the Ranges. There is one Wildlife Research Officer who looks after research &development and coordinates with various NGOs and wildlife research institutions
including the Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun.
Ranges Of Kaziranga National Park
Originally the Park had three ranges namely Eastern Range with its HQ at Agaratoli,
Central Range with its HQ at Kohora and the Western Range with its HQ at Bagori. In theyear 1990, the 1st Addition area was constituted into Burapahar Range with its HQ at
Ghorakati. Kukrakata RF was brought to the park in 2002 under the Burapahar Range.
Northern Range was established in 2010 to provide protection to the riverine areas of theBrahmaputra river, in principle covering all the 6 th Addition areas to the National Park. The
Central Range, also known as Kaziranga Range of Kaziranga, is the oldest range
established on the 1st April, 1949.
Beats And Anti-Poaching Camps
There are two notified account beats in the EAWL Division namely the Burapahar Beatunder Bagori Range and the Bokakhat Beat at the Divisional HQ. Additionally there are anumber of beats/ sub beats under whom a large number of anti poaching camps function.
In 1980, there were only 45 anti poaching camps. Due to increase in incidence of poaching,
the number of camps were steadily increased. I 2001, there were 212 anti poaching camps.
In 2003, there were 125 camps, and the number to increased to 160 at the end of 2013. The
current number of anti poaching camps is 174 including 9 floating camps. This number islikely to increase further. The park has 9 nos. of floating camps, along with several speedboats and many country boats, to carry out patrolling duty on the Brahmaputra river.
The anti poaching camps have grown over a long period of time in consonance withpoaching practices prevalent during that period. As a result, the Park is not uniformly
covered by the camps. At several places, the camps appear very closely, and yet at many
places, there is more than 5 km distance between two camps. Given the current trends ofpoaching, it is now felt that there is a need for large number of camps and watch towers on
the periphery of the Park. While increasing the camps would be the easiest thing to achieve,
placement of well trained and motivated staff in adequate numbers remains the key issue.
Some camps are running with home-guards and casual workers alone, a situation whichneeds to be remedied fast.
Further, as a piece of infrastructure, the anti poaching camps, as some of them are reallyvery old, need a new thinking. Several of the camps are old and dilapidated and unfit forhuman habitation. Several of the new camps, though full RCC, do not seem to be welldesigned resulting in poor performance of the staff. The concept of watch tower cum campis relatively new in Kaziranga. There is also no established system of “watch post” or “sentry
post” which is manned 24X7. Probably, the earlier poaching practices and patrolling duty
patterns did not warrant such a system.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 67 of 402

When one objectively analyses the anti poaching infrastructure in the light of the current
poaching pressures (which is the highest ever in Kaziranga in terms of number of attempts
happening daily and attempts converted into successful poaching), it is seen that all thecurrent anti poaching camps must be rebuilt in next 1-3 years, so that new strategies ofprotection could be effectively implemented. Further, there is a demand to increase thenumber of staff. If so, the existing design of the anti poaching camps would not be able totake the manpower load. In each range, we may have to develop a centralized
infrastructure at two or three places, so that they can act as “base camp”. While the regularcamps can continue to do “regular” patrolling and management works”, the base camps can
add the surprise element, and sustain 24X7 surveillance which is currently not possible to be
implemented in the Park within the given resources.
3.1.6

Roads and Bridges

The road network inside the Park consist of a Central Path, in each range (barring theNorthern Range), fair weather paths (which are motorable) and patrolling paths (which arefoot path). Vehicles (4 wheel drive light vehicle such as Maruti Gypsy) can ply only on
Central paths and the fair weather paths during fair weather. The total length of the Central
path is 95 km combining all the four ranges on the south side. The fair weather paths
measure about 210 km in length. There are about 350 km of patrolling path. During floods,
limited communication happens through boats etc. The Park maintains about 65 km of
critial paths called “Boat lines”. Since Kaziranga is nourished by flood waters of theBrahmaputra river annually, and water flows during floods, east-west or west-east, building
roads in the south-north directions is fraught with ecological disasters. Therefore, thepractice followed in the Park is to make roads only as per ground terrain so that either it
can be washed away during floods, or can easily allow passage of water. If east-west
flowing flood water happens to strike a resistance in the north-south direction, the silt gets
dropped leading to heavy siltation of water bodies and, thus, loss of critical habitat.
Another critical factor in road alignment is the existence of a large number of water bodies
and streams. While several streams have been bridged, and a lot more need to be bridged
further, the beels are sensitive to construction, as chances of silt deposition become highas soon as a column/ structure is placed therein. Several beels have got silted up due tocertain short sighted attempts in the past to create man-made engineering structuresinside. So far long span column-less suspension bridges have not been tried due to highcosts.
Therefore, roads cannot be built everywhere in the Park, and also they do not seem tohave much chance of becoming smooth and fast to vehicle plying. This has a major
impact on poaching, as the reaction time for the staff to reach the place of occurrence isvery high. As the geo-spatial configuration of the park is interspersed with large number ofwater bodies, it is also not possible to make a regular grid inside the Park.
After the floods subside, road opening exercises are undertaken annually which is time
consuming, again giving advantage to the Poachers for atleast three to four months after
the rains have stopped. Several streams and nallah remain un-openable as late as
January-February. The possible solution to these seem to rebuild suspension bridges over
all major streams (and this number could be as high as 50 or more), and also build
causeways in all minor streams along the alignments. Only this can ensure thatPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 68 of 402

communication can be established immediately after the water subsides in the
Brahmaputra.
3.1.7

Wireless Communication System

The wireless communication system was set up in Kaziranga as early as 1987 with theassistance of Webel, a Govt. of West Bengal enterprise. The network was revamped in1990 with financial assistance from Aaranyak-DSWF. Currently there are 266 handsets, 9
vehicular sets, 37 base stations and no repeater stations. The system is analog in natureand mainly due to low height of the towers, does not adequately cover the Park. There areseveral shadow areas. There are also challenges in in maintenance of the handsets. The
current position of the wireless systems is shown below:
In Service

In need of Repairs

Total

1

Sl No.

Handsets

145

121

266

2

Base Stations

30

7

37

3

Vehicular Sets

9

0

9

3.1.8

Wireless Equipment

Weaponry

The Park has a mix of arms and weapons such as rifles (0.315 and 0.303), .32 Revolver,
Double Barrel Guns (DBBL), Single Barrel Guns (SBBL) and Tranquilizing Guns ().22,
0.243, 0.470, 0.404). The total no of arms owned by the Park authorities is as shown
below:Sl No.
WeaponQuantity
1

0.315

498

2

0.303

200

3

0.32

12

4

DBBL

65

5

SBBL

33

TOTAL

808

The AFPF forces deployed in the Park have the following arms:
Sl No.
WeaponQuantity

1

0.303

316

2

SLR

166

3

Carbine

20

TOTAL

502

There are 129 Home Guards currently deployed. Their number keeps on fluctuating
depending upon their retrenchment and new appointments. The Home Guards carry 0.303
rifles.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 69 of 402

3.1.9Other Anti Poaching Infrastructure, Gears and Logistics

Uniform:
To maintain discipline and enforce effective patrolling and protection duties uniform plays avital role. However, it has been observed that uniform supply from the Govt. sources has
been erratic. In the past, the Park had to depend upon NGO sources for supply of uniform.
The Wildlife Areas Development and Welfare Trust (WWT) also supplied uniform in thepast. After the Kaziranga Staff Welfare Society was formed in 1990, the uniform was also
given from the society. These efforts have been piecemeal and partial in nature. Every
year the staff should get two sets of uniform including one set of rain coat and one set ofwoolen jersey and inner thermals.
Anti-Riot Gears:
Of late, there have been several instances of organized fishing wherein hundreds ofindividuals and groups come from adjoining areas to fish inside the water bodies of thePark along the NH37. There had been atleast 3 such incidents in past 4 months. The staff
had to come to blows with the public, leading to injuries on both sides and also blocking of
highway NH37 and public resorting to burning of camps. The staff did not have any gears
to deal with large mobs. Therefore, the following equipment were recently procured by thePark authorities:
1. 100 nos of Polycarbonate Lathis
2. 100 nos of FRP Helmets
3. 100 nos of Half Body Protectors
4. 100 nos of Polycarbonate Shield
Torches and Other Gears:
The Park authorities have been providing logistic support such as torches (two per camp)with consumables such as battery and bulb, water filter, kerosene oil for illumination, solar
lantern, solar chargers etc. However, some of the basic amenities such as camp cots havebeen mostly improvised by the field staff using local materials. It is also to be noted thatcurrently none of the camps have binoculars, what to speak of night vision devices.

Floating Camps:
There are 6 floating camps namely Unicornis, Tigris, Luit, King Fisher, Samrat and Hawk
Float on the Brahmaputra river. The biggest of them is the Unicornis and can house 4-8
persons. These vessels need regular maintenance and repairs.
Speed Boats and Other Boats:
The Park has currently 11 number of speed boats including 4 modern semi automatic front
drive speed boats procured in 2013-14, two rubber boats. There are 3 nos. of mechanizedboats (Bhutbhuti), and 3 nos are under construction. These are likely to be pressed inservice by end of July, 2014. There are more than 150 country boats. Almost every camp
has been provided with country boats.
Vehicles:PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 70 of 402

There are a total of 41 vehicles in Kaziranga, of which only 29 are in running condition;and 12 nos are beyond economic repair. Out of this, there are 16 nos of Maruti Gypsies, ofwhich 12 are in running condition and 4 nos beyond repair.
Manpower Training:
There are 23 trained Forester I against in harness 31, and 110 trained Forest Guards
against deployed 198. It is not possible to send large batches for training outside the Park.
During 2014, training sessions are being organized in batches of 20 at Seconee, the HQ ofthe 2nd AFPF. Already one batch has received training. Another recent training initiative
was for imparting 10 day training on wildlife crime investigation to the field officers in themonth of June, 2014. Another international exposure on wildlife crime scene investigation
was provided to field staff on the 29 th May, 2014 at Kohora by the visiting experts fromSouth Africa on Rhodis. Brief about Rhodis is being provided separately in Chapter 5.
The staff require a lot of target practice. It is planned to hold target practice in the Police
Training College, Dergaon shooting range. The terrain of Kaziranga is physically very
challenging, and regular trainings and physical fitness camps are required to be held.
3.1.10 Departmental Elephants
The anti poaching story of Kaziranga cannot be complete without mention of thedepartmental elephants. It deserves actually a special chapter for the yeoman services
rendered by them in protection of the rhinoceros and maintenance of all round vigil in thePark. The Kaziranga National Park has 55 elephants. The range wise break up ofelephants is given below:
Male

FemaleCalf

1.

Sl. NoEastern Range

6

3

2♀

11

2.

Kaziranga Range

16

14

2♀ 1♂

33

3.

Range

Total

Western Range

1

8

1♀ 1♂

11

TOTAL

23

25

5♀ 2♂

55

Some of the legendary elephants of Kaziranga are Akbar (born 1886) inducted in the
Department on 13th April, 1942, and Shahjahan (born 1931) inducted in the Department on
23rd November, 1976. Akbar, who died on the 6 th July, 1956.. Joyraj (born 1952) was
inducted in the Department on 9 th April, 1967. He died retired in 2013. The otherlegendary elephants include Gadapani, Joydhwaj, Padmini etc. One of them had thefortune of carrying Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru on his back during the latter's visit toKaziranga in 1956. The Kaziranga elephants have been the charm of morning safari whichdraws tourists from across the world. However, there was a time during 1995-96 when
there was even no fund to feed the elephants. It was the Department contributed, every
one from the then Minister, Commissioner & Secretary, PCCF down to Forest guard, one
day's salary and formed the Wildlife Areas Development and Welfare Fund (WWT) on the
17th September, 1996 at the Assam State Zoo, Guwahti. This Trust contributed significantly
towards welfare of the elephants (including feeds, medicine and health check up) andwelfare of staff, and building of new camps etc in Kaziranga and getting new speed boats
and vehicles. [The author along with Sri H.K. Choudhury IFS (Retd) used to work for the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 71 of 402

Trust and Kaziranga as Asstt Secretary of the Trust when posted as Working Plan Officer
Upper Assam Circle, Jorhat]. Today, the 1995-96 kind of financial crisis is not there, but isis felt that better care better feed and better amenities need to be provided to thedepartmental elephants and the mahouts. As of now 9 (nine) posts of mahout are vacant,and the gap is filled by casual workers. The total number of posts of mahout is only 37,
against 55 elephants.
3.1.11 Staff Welfare
There are several issues pertaining to staff welfare such as ration, housing medical care,education of children etc. Ration allowance was given from the year 2006-07 to front-line
staff in form of an allowance of Rs. 500 per month upto Dy Ranger. Some family dwelling
units were also constructed in 2005. However, a lot more is required to be done.
The Staff welfare activities were first started systematically with the establishment of the
Wildlife Areas Development and Welfare Trust (WWT) under the Chairmanship of Sri H.K.
Choundhury IFS (Retd.), former PCCF, Assam, [who still continues to be actively involvedin the Trust activities as its Chairman]. The first set of quality uniforms to all the staff alongwith shoes were provided by the Trust towards the end of 1996 [and the author personallydid the purchases for the staff]. The Trust initiated ex-gratia grant for the staff either killed
or injured on duty. Encouraged by the works of the Trust, the Park authorities, under theactive leadership of Sri B. S. Bonal IFS, the then Director, Kaziranga National Park,
constituted a society for welfare of the staff in the name and style of Kaziranga National
Park Staff Welfare Society in 1999. The Society has been giving grants for medical
treatment of staff injured while on duty; and also loan to the needy staff. The Society is
chaired by the Director, Kaziranga National Park and DFO, EAWL, Bokakhat as member
Secretary.
Financial assistance paid to the staff members of the Kaziranga National Park fortreatment of injuries sustained while on duty and to the inhabitants of the fringe villages fortreatment of injuries sustained from wild animal attacks ad domestic cattle killed by tiger
etc. from 2013 to 2013 comes to Rs. 26.00 lakh touching 237 beneficiaries. Similarly thestaff members and their family members are give loan for medical treatment from theSociety. So far since 203 to 2013, 161 number of staff have been benefited and Rs. 11.73
lakh has been disbursed as loan assistance.
3.1.12 The Role of AFPF HQ:
The shifting of the HQ of the 2nd AFPF from Guwahati to Seconee, in the opinion of theauthor, in the month of March, 2014 has had a very positive impact on the anti poachingstrategies in the Park. If the Government establishes two more battalions of the AFPF, their
HQ should be located near Nagaon (anywhere after Kalia Bhomora bridge, and before
Laokhowa), and secondly somewhere near Numaligarh. This would ensure a very good
protection to the proposed Kaziranga landscape.
3.2

Nagaon Wildlife Division

The Laokhowa and Burhachapori Wildlife Sanctuaries (LBWLS) are two important
protected areas of Central Assam, administered by the Nagaon Wildlife Division,
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. Laokhowa WLS (LWLS) is located between latitudes
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 72 of 402

26°28'31.85"N to 26°32'13.95"N and longitudes 92°37'57.91"E to 92°47'23.27"E having a
total area of 70.1 sq.km in Nagaon district. Burhachapori WLS (BWLS) is located between
the latitudes 26°30'34.16"N to 26°33'48.96"N and longitudes 92°34'27.31"E to92°46'10.667"E with a total area of 44.06 sq.km in Sonitpur district. The total area of thetwo sanctuaries is 114.16 sq.km and are contiguous to each other. Both the PAs along withthe adjacent Brahmaputra riverine tract act as migratory corridor for wild animals of
Kaziranga and Orang NPs. They have, therefore, been notified as buffer zones of the
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve (KTR). Further, the Kochmara Reserve Forest, having a total
area of 21.55 sq.km. in Sonitpur district, is also administered by the Nagaon Wildlife
Division.
The Laokhowa WLS was declared as a Reserve Forest in the year 1907, Game Sanctuary
in 1916, Wildlife Sanctuary in 1979 and brought under the administration of the Kaziranga
Tiger Reserve in the year 2007. Burhachapori WLS was declared as a Reserve Forest in
1974 (prior to that, it was a Professional grazing Reserve), Wildlife Sanctuary in 1995 andbrought under the administration of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve in the year 2007.
Towards North of the Burhachapori WLS, flows the mighty Brahmaputra River which
creates numerous river islands locally known as chars. A number of these river islands areunder the occupation of migrant people from different parts of the states. Some of theislands are occupied by the khutti (dairy farm) dwellers. A few river islands are stillunoccupied. The habitat of these islands may be the ideal home of several herbivorous
animals and different grassland bird species. Therefore, the islands are to be regarded asboth the habitat and corridor of the wild animals from the nearby PAs.
It is important that the Kaziranga - Laokhowa & Burhachapori - Orang Brahmaputra
riverine corridor is secured so as to ensure the healthy genetic exchange of wildlife.
Otherwise wildlife of the adjacent protected areas would not be able to sustain in the longrun. Further, the islands in the region are home to many antisocial elements, some ofwhich have been found to be directly associated with rhino poaching in Kaziranga andOranga NPs. To avoid such a situation, the region between the Koliabhomora Bridge andthe Majarbali Chapori, should be immediately brought under the administrative control of
the Burhachapori WLS. In the longer run, the entire stretch of 250 sq. km. right from the
Koliabhomora Bridge up to the Singri hills in Sonitpur district must be added to the
Burhachapori WLS as its 1st Addition. This would ensure a contiguous wildlife migratory
corridor within the PA landscape in question. A proposal in this regard already submitted to
the Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur.
3.2.1

Manpower

The Nagaon Wildlife Division has a sanctioned strength of 186 personnel, including DFO,
ACF, Range Officers, Deputy Rangers, Forester Grade I, Forester Grade II, Forest Guard,
Game Watcher, Mahut, Grass Cutter and Boatman. The front-line staff is mostly armed
with .315 guns. The staff also use DBBL guns to handle man-animal conflict.
The snapshot of staff strength from 1990 to 2012 can be seen in the table below. The
Pabitora Wildlife Sanctuary was under control of Nagaon Wildlife Division till 2006. In theyear 2007 Pabitora WLS brought under administrative control of Guwahati WL Division
and Burhachapori brought under the administrative control of Nagaon WL division from theWestern Assam WL Division.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 73 of 402

Sl.N
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Post
D.C.F.
A.C.F
Forest Ranger
Deputy Ranger
Accountant
Sr. Assistant.
Jr. Assistant.
Range Asstt.
Forester-I
Forester- II
Forest Guard
Game Watcher
Boat- Man
Driver
O.B.M. Driver
Grass - Cutter
Mahut
Chowkidar
Office Peon
School Teacher
Total

1990
1
0
3
3
1
2
4
2
26
18
108
27
17
8
1
5
5
4
2
1
238

Year
2004
1
0
2
3
1
2
4
2
26
18
108
27
17
8
1
5
5
4
2
1
237

2007
1
0
4
3
1
2
4
2
22
15
86
17
14
5
1
2
1
3
2
1
186

2012
1
1
4
3
1
2
4
2
22
15
86
17
14
5
1
2
1
3
2
1
187

Of the above sanctioned strength, the men in harness are only 149. There are 38 nos ofvacancies: Forest Ranger 2, dy Ranger 1, Fr I 5, fr II 8, Forest Guard 11, game Watcher 7,
Driver 3, and Office Peon 1.
AFPF Deployment:
The Nagaon Wildlife Division has one section of Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF)
personnel stationed at the Burhachapori WLS. Most of the personnel are armed with .303
rifles. The primary duty of the AFPF personnel is River Patrolling in between the westernboundary of the Kaziranga National Park (Koliabhomora Bridge) till the eastern boundaryof Orang National Park (Pachnoimukh).
Participatory Protection:
The Nagaon Wildlife Division has constituted two ‘Local Protection Squads' comprising of
motivated youths and they are being engaged in active patrolling duties with the frontline
staff and two such squads consisting of 24 members is actively working with the frontline
staff of these two PAs. The youths are being paid monthly stipend by the Nagaon Wildlife
Division under the Project Tiger. Eco-development committees (EDC) in the fringe andforest villages of the Laokhowa and Burhachapori WLSs were formed under the Joint(people‟s participation) Forest Management Rules – 1998, under Nagaon Wildlife Division,
Nagaon under the jurisdiction of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. As of today, there are 28
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 74 of 402

registered numbers of EDCs and 10 proposed EDCs in the fringe and forest villages of thebuffer area constituted within the Nagaon Wildlife Divisional Forest Development Agency(NWDFDA). All the Executive Body members of the EDCs are being constantly trained andoriented towards the process of participatory management of protected areas.
A number of entry point activities in the fringe and forest villages through the EDCs arebeing undertaken such as repairing of village road, construction of school buildings;
community halls; temples and mosques, providing school uniforms and reading and writing
materials, organising free health camps, providing solar mobile charging facilities alongwith television sets with DTH facilities in the community halls among others.
3.2.2

Present Administrative Set Up and Anti Poaching Infrastructure

The Nagaon Wildlife Division, which is having two WLSs and one R.F. under its
administration, is directly controlled by the P.C.C.F., Wildlife. The Kaziranga Tiger Reserve
Area (comprising of the two WLSs) is administered by the Director, Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve. The Director has the overall superintendence and control over the managementof the Tiger Reserve area under Nagaon Wildlife Division. He is assisted by one Divisional
Forest Officer, Nagaon Wildlife Division who implements the management decisions. The
DFO, in turn, is assisted by one Assistant Conservator of Forests, and two Range Forest
Officers who are in charge of the Ranges.
Ranges of Laokhowa & Burhachapori WLS:
Laokhowa WLS: Prior to 1979, the Gorajan was a Beat under the Northern Range,
Salonah, under Nagaon Territorial Division. After Laokhowa was notified as a WLS, it was
upgraded into Range in 1979. Up to 1986, Laokhowa was administered by the Western
Assam Wildlife Division, Tezpur and in the year 1990, it was brought under theadministration of the newly created Nagaon Wildlife Division.
Burhachapori WLS: In 1974, the Burhachapori RF was under Dhania Sub-Beat under
Sadar Account Beat, Tezpur, Darrang Division. In 1987, the Burhachapori RF was brought
under the administrative control of the Divisional Forest Officer, Western Assam Wildlife
Division, Tezpur from Darrang Division. Burhachapori RF was handed over to theadministrative control of newly created Nagaon Wildlife Division, Nagaon in the year 1990.
The RF was handed back to Western Assam Wildlife Division, Tezpur in 1992. The Dhania
Beat was upgraded to the status of Range in July 1993. In 2007 the Burhachapori WLS
was brought under the administrative control of Nagaon Wildlife Division.
Beats and Anti-Poaching Camps:
There are three notified beats in the Nagaon Wildlife Division namely the Sadar Beat at theDivisional HQ,, Laokhowa and Sutirpar Beats under Gorajan Range, Laokhowa WLS.
Apart from the beats, there are a number of anti poaching camps in both the WLSs. The
current number of anti poaching camps is 33 (including 2 watchtowers) in addition to one
floating camp. A number of anti poaching camps, which have grown old over a long periodof time have been renovated. At several places, the camps appear very closely, with anaverage distance of about 2 km between camps. There is a need to increase the numberof floating camps in the Brahmaputra riverine tract adjoining the Burhachapori WLS
manned by well trained and motivated staff in adequate numbers. With the upcomingtranslocation of rhinos to the Laokhowa-Burhachapori WLS complex, the existing camp
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 75 of 402

infrastructure needs to be upgraded further. While the regular camps can continue to do“regular” patrolling and management works”, designated base camps can add the surpriseelement, and sustain 24X7 surveillance and "Tongis" are to be constructed at strategic
points.
Roads & Bridges: There are 2 Central Roads in both Laokhowa and Burhachapori WLSs.
The total length of the motorable roads is 65 km and non-motorable roads is 41 km.
Burhachapori has 7 culverts while Laokhowa has 6 culverts. Almost all the roads become
un-motorable during floods. After the floods subside, road opening exercises areundertaken annually. There is a need to construct at least two small bridges over the
Dhania Suti to ensure connectivity between the Laokhowa and Burhachapori WLSs as
well as build causeways in all minor streams along the desirable alignments.
Wireless Communication System: Currently there are 34 working handsets and 10
base stations (including vehicular sets). The system is analog in nature and mainly due tolow height of the towers, there are some shadow areas.
Sl. No.

In Service

In need of Repairs

1

Handsets

Wireless Equipment

34

20

Total
54

2

Base Stations

10

05

15

Weaponry : The Nagaon Wildlife Division has a mix of arms and weapons such as rifles(0.315), .32 Revolver, Double Barrel Guns (DBBL) and Sporting Rifle. The total nos. ofarms owned by the Division is as shown below:
Sl No.

Weapon1

0.315

Quantity
36

2Sporting Rifle

01

3

Revolver

02

4

DBBL

28

TOTAL

67

The AFPF forces have 10 nos of 0.303 rifles.
3.2.3

Other Anti Poaching Infrastructure, Gears and Logistics

Uniform: To maintain discipline and enforce effective patrolling and protection duties
uniform plays a vital role. The Department supplies the forest staff with uniforms.
Organisations such as the WWF have been providing the staff with sweaters, shoes,
raincoats etc.
Torches and Other Gears: The Nagaon Wildlife Division and organisations such as WWF
have been providing logistic support such as torches (39 nos.) with consumables such asbattery and bulb, dragon lights (35 nos.), solar search lights (40 nos.) water filter, kerosene
oil for illumination, solar lantern (55 nos.), solar chargers (35 nos.), GPS (18 nos.),binoculars (7 nos.), digital cameras (5 nos.), motorcycles (3 nos.), bicycles (65 nos.), etc.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 76 of 402

Floating Camps: There is 1 floating camp namely Dolphin, on the Brahmaputra riverwhich can house 4-6 persons. This vessel need regular maintenance and repairs. Twomore floating camps have been proposed under the IRV programme.
Speed Boats and Other Boats: The Burhachapori WLS has 3 speed boats, 1
mechanised boats ('bhutbhuti') and 13 country boats. Laokhowa WLS has 15 countryboats.
Vehicles: There are a total of 7 vehicles in Nagaon Wildlife Division, of which 6 are inrunning condition; and 1 nos is beyond repair. Out of this, there are 4 nos of Maruti
Gypsies, of which 3 are in running condition and 1 nos beyond repair.
Manpower Training: There are 15 (out of 16) trained Forester I, 5 (out of 7) trained
Forester II and 63 (out of 76) trained Forest Guards.
3.2.4

Staff Welfare:

Since the year 2006-07 the front-line staff receiving Rs 500 in form of ration allowanceevery month upto the rank of Deputy Ranger. In addition to that, the Project Tiger
allowance is also given to the frontline staff on monthly basis. A society for welfare of thestaff has been proposed by the Nagaon Wildlife Division.
3.3

Other Stakeholding Managers

Currently, the peripheral wildlife activities are supported by the adjoining territorial
devisions such as Golaghat, Jorhat and Nagaon Forest Divisions on the south andLakhimpur Forest Division, Sonitpur (East) Forest Division, Sonitpur (West) Forest Divisonon the north bank, and the Karbi Anglong (East) Forest Division in the Council areas.
These are the forest divisions neighbouring Kaziranga, whose support often become very
crucial iin effective management of man-animal interactions, straying of rhinos beyond
Kaziranga and elephant depredation. As of now, very little support is provided by the Park/
Tiger Reserve authorities to these divisions. However, there is a need to strengthen thesedivisions on the lines of wildlife for better management in the landscape.
3.4

Conclusion

The following, in brief, are the key protection related facts and figures:1. The sanctioned staff strength of EAWL Division has remained practically stagnant
since 1987. From 1987 to 2001 only 24 posts have been added, raising the tally to
562 which continues till date, against the area undertaken for protection has
doubled since 1987.
2. Of the 562 sanctioned strength, there are 97 vacancies till date.
3. There are 41 number of invalid staff of the 465 men in position.
4. The AFPF force deployment has increased considerably in last few years. The Park
deploys as of now 447 nos of AFPF personnel.
5. There are 129 home guards, 163 nos of casual workers and 25 nos of Tourist
Guides deployed in the Park.
6. In 2003 there were 125 anti poaching camps and today the number is 174 including
9 floating camps
7. The total length of the central paths measure 95 km, and 210 km of fair weather
paths.
8. 46% of the wireless handsets are out of order.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 77 of 402

9. The Park has about 800 arms consisting of 0.315, 0.303 and other weapons. The
AFPF and Home Guards have their own weapons.
10. There are 41 vehicles of which only 29 are in running condition.
11. There are 55 Departmental Elephants in Kaziranga.
12. The Nagaon Wildlife Division has sanctioned strength of 187 staff, of which 38 arevacant.
13. There are 34 number of anti poaching camps in the Division.
14. The motorable road network is of 65 km length.
15. 37% of the wireless handsets are out of order.
16. There are 7 vehicles of which 1 is not in working condition

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 78 of 402

CHAPTER 4
4

People and Development Issues

4.1

People on the Fringe of Kaziranga

Kaziranga is surrounded by population on all the sides. Noted are the townships of
Bokakhat and Jakhlabandha on the south and Biswanath Ghat on the north. Kohora andBagori are largely tourist townships on the south side. NH37 predominantly defines thelandscape. The Park falls in three districts namely Golaghat, Nagaon and Sonitpur andborders Karbi Anglong district. The two civil sub divisions namely Bokakhat and Kaliabor
and two Police Stations namely Bokakhat and Jakhlabandha control the whole civil area
falling south of the Park boundary. On the north, the civil jurisdiction belongs to the
Biswanath Sub Division, and there are seven Police Stations namely Gohpur, Helem,
Behali, Gingia, Biswanath, Sootea and Jamuguri.
Since 6th Addition has not formally been handed over, the rest of the discussion shall be
confined to the south bank only.
Within Kaliabor sub-division, there are a total of 225 number of villages with 40,882
households and a population of 1,95,713 as per 2011 census. Of these, there are 34
villages in the Kaliabor Revenue Circle in the proximity of the Kaziranga National Park,with a population of 19,947. In Bokakhat sub division, if we take only the Bokakhat
Revenue Circle alone which has relevance for Kaziranga, there are 40 villages with 9568
families and a population of 46,572 persons. The demographic constitution on Bokakhatside is mainly Assamese, Missing, Muslim, Bengali, Hindi Speaking and Tea tribes. The
demography on Kaliabor side is also similar with addition of Karbi tribes.
4.1.1

Eco-Development Committees (EDCs)

EDCs are formed to provide sustainable development to the villages from thefringed villages, thereby reducing their dependency on the forest resources.
This is likely to improve their basic economic condition and level of sustenance.
This will also result in bringing awareness among the villagers about thenecessities of the forest and the forest resources which will make them standfor the protection of Kaziranga. EDCs are typically formed from the fringe
village population which could be within 1-3 km of the boundary of the Park.
To constitute an EDC, irst of all atleast 50% inhabitants must agree to do so.
The EDC consists of one person from the village as president, forest oicial as amember secretary, few executive members of about 7 to 9 person comprisingof male and female in the 3:2 ratio. Household is taken as unit of the EDC andall the house holds of the village in that EDC become the general members. At
present there are 33 registered EDC under the Eastern Assam Wildlife Divisionand 26 proposed EDC which falls under Golaghat district and Koliabor subdivision. Joint Bank account has been opened in the name of president andmember secretary. As of now microplan of 10 EDC's is in the process ofcompletion. EDCs work under overall administration of the Forest Development
Agency (FDA). The FDA for Kaziranga was registered on 24th July, 2011.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 79 of 402

The EDCs so far could not function smoothly due to mainly issues in registration andpreparation of the micro-plans, collection of baseline data etc. Some of these works havenow been initiated and it is expected that EDCs will take shape by the end of the calendar
year, 2014.
The names of the already registered and proposed EDCs are given in the Tables below:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 80 of 402

LIST OF EXISTING EDCs
Sl.
No
1

Name of EDC
Sildubi-Haldhibari

2
3
4

Hatikholi-Amguri-Holmora
No.1 Kohora
Halowa N.C.

5

Chepenakubua

6
7
8
9
10

Bocha gaon
Kakojuri-Panbari
Diffalopathar
Japoripather
Da-Gosaqnibor

11

Lukhurakhania-Domjan

12No.2 Kohora-Mohpora

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Panbari Missing Adarsagaon
Palashguri-Dhansirimukh
Ahomgaon
Dhubaati-Beloguri
Teliabari-Sarogaon
Egaratoli
Tamulipather
Borbheta
Bohikhowa
Bagori23

Harmoti24

Nabasti-Najan

25

Kuthori-Baghmari

26

Deopani-Bandardubi

27

Kanchanjuri-Mandugaon

28

Noharubasti-Silimkhowa

29
30
31
32
33

Natundanga
Rangolu gaon
Amguri gaon
Deosur chang
Phuloguri Chang

PIL 66/2012

Name of Revenue
VillageNo.1 Sildubi
No.2 Sildubi
Haldhibari
Hatikholi T.G.
No.1 Kohora
Halowa N.C.
Chepenakubua
Halowa gaon
Bocha gaon
KakojuriDifflopathar
Japoripather
Gosanibor
Lukhurakhania
Domjan No.1
Domjan No.2
No.2 Kohora
MohporaHouse holdPopulation

126
111
85
965
413
310
168
13
291
137
618
63
229
79
68
28
124
104

596
624
397
4624
1899
1311
714
47
1404
707
3010
297
1071
348
341
145
672
529

Palashguri
Ahomgaon
Beloguri

240
361
162

1221
1784
956

Egaratoli
Tamulipather
Borbheta
Bohikhowa
BagoriHarmoti No.1
Harmoti No.2
Nabasti
Najan
Kuthori
Kuthori T.E.

32
97
190
493
278
259
107
153
442
170
76
103
146
153
214
58
77
116
79
91
157
207
78
8471

156
529
924
3139
1223
1394
520
670
2137
777
331
465
703
833
1285
248
336
619
594
923
349
1078
1051
42981

Remarks

Suspended

Suspended

Baghmari
Deopani
Bandardubi
Kanchanjuri
Nohorubasti
Silimkhowa
Natundanga
Rangolu gaon
Amguri gaon
Deosur chang
Phuloguri chang

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 81 of 402

Proposed EDCs:
There are 26 new proposed EDCs around the Kaziranga National Park on the south bankside. The north bank areas have not yet been proposed as the official handover of the land
has not taken place till date.

Sl
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

TENTATIVE LIST OF VILLAGES PROPOSED FOR NEXT PHASE OF EDC
Name of Revenue Village
No. ofPopulation
Revenue Circle
Household/Family
Kaziranga NC
32
204
BokakhatGeleki Mikirgaon
357
1610
Bokakhat
Siljuri138
584
Bokakhat
Borjuri Bagisa
244
1201
Bokakhat
Borjuri Gaon
304
1462
Bokakhat
Kandhulimari
316
1602
Bokakhat
Bangali Gaon
313
1424
Bokakhat
Balijan792
3953
Bokakhat
Koroiati
138
648
Bokakhat
Bezgaon22
88
Bokakhat
Kumarani Pathar
75
383
Bokakhat
Kumaraniati
139
786
Bokakhat
Da Gaon394
1721
Bokakhat
Amguri Chang
157
767
Kaliabor
Palkhowa
5
35
Kaliabor
Burapahar No.1
12
54
Kaliabor
Kawaimari532
Kaliabor
Burapahar T.E. No.1
154
892
Kaliabor
Burapahar No.2
62
282
Kaliabor
Injai (Jujai)
25
128
Kaliabor
Pub Deopani
86
455
Kaliabor
Najan NC
47
268
Kaliabor
Bagori NC
40
203
Kaliabor
Dakhin Deopani
21
88
Kaliabor
Kalapanimukh
8
46
Kaliabor
Kasojuri27
126
Kaliabor
3913
19042

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 82 of 402

4.2

EDC Fact Sheets

A survey of all the existing 33 EDCs was initiated in April, 2014 to collect the baseline datafor planning and preparation of micro-plans. Printed forms were circulated to all the EDCs
with one form of several pages per family. Volunteers of WWF have been engaged toassist the EDC members and villagers for filling up of the forms. The forms are in local
language. Data has so far been gathered for more than 30 villages. Data analysis has
been completed for five EDCs comprising of 19 villages. These are ChilimkhowaNeherubasti (2), Kanchanjuri (5), Harmoti (2), Kuthuri-Baghmari (8) and Deopani
Bandardubi (2). There are a total of 1527 households in these EDCs with a total populationof 6386 persons. As per the census of 2011, there are only 11 no. of revenue villages inthese 5 EDCs. However, on ground survey 19 villages have been reported. It shows thatduring past few year, atleast 8 no. of villages were allowed to be set up.
4.2.1

Demographics

The communities residing in these villages are Karbi, Muslim and tea garden communities.
Literacy rate is 56%. About 67% families are BPL.
4.2.2

Land and land Holdings

The total land in the 5 EDCs comes to 5102.9 Bigha. There are 62 families classified
under medium land holding, and only one family as large land holding. There are 154
families with small land holding. Rest are landless or marginal farmers. The percentage ofmarginal and landless families comes to a staggering figure of 85% in these EDCs.
4.2.3

Livelihood Options

Of the surveyed population, it was found that 867 families are solely dependent upon daily
wage earnings. 516 families are engaged in farming, while 318 families are engaged insome or other petty businesses. Only in 35 households, there are persons in service.
About 66 families are surviving on skilled labour such as carpentry, masonry, driver etc.
Only six families are engaged in collection and sale of NTFP (in Silimkhowa-Neherubasti
EDC), while 12 families of this EDC and 5 families of Kanchanjuri are engaged in fisheries.
4.2.4

Livestock

There are 4536 heads of cattle in the 5 EDCs along with 3064 goats and 925 pigs. There
are 144 other animals including buffalo and horses/ ponies. There are 1745 ducks and9540 hens. The average per family cattle comes to 3.05, goat 2.06, pig 0.63, hens 6.42
and ducks 1.18.
4.2.5

Housing, Electricity, Water and Energy

About 369 houses are pucca, and the rest are all kuccha houses. The % of pucca houses
comes to 24.85%. Only 27% houses were found to be having electricity connection. Tube
well is the most common source of water, followed by ring well and ponds. There are about
90 ring wells in the surveyed villages. Several families take water from springs or ponds.
For cooking energy all households depend upon firewood. LPG was found only in 167
households, which is just 11.25% of the total household surveyed. All households also
used kerosene for lighting purposes.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 83 of 402

4.2.6

Man Animal Interactions

It was found from the survey that 720 households were affected by elephant depredation.
This constitutes almost 47% of the households. 35% of the households admitted that they
were affected by wild buffalo. Wild boar affected 12% of the households. However, tiger
depredation affected just about 22 households which is just little more than 1%.
4.3

Challenges Faced by the Fringe Village Communities

As can be seen from the field survey, most communities are very poor, landless and havelittle or no means of survival. Some of the key challenges faced by them are:1. Limited or no access to clean drinking water, power and LPG.
2. Lack of amenities such as school, hospital, vet centre.
3. Since more than 55% families are daily wage earners, livelihood options are very
limited.
4. Almost all the households are affected by animal depredations and crop damage.
5. On average, land holdings are 3 bighas or less.
6. There are little options for alternate livelihoods.
4.4

Tourism

It may be noted that there has been almost 7 times increase in inflow of tourists from
1996-97 to 2011-12. There has been spurt in number of private accommodation over thelast decade, and no doubt the overall infrastructure has become better. However, this has
led to increased construction, blocking of corridors, mushrooming of hotels, dhabas andrestaurants. The pollution levels also seem to have gone up, with increased garbage. All
the hotels do not follow the system of solid waste management. The carrying capacity ofthe park needs to be evaluated, and tourism needs to be regulated, along with strict
enforcement of regulations for hotels, restaurants etc.
Year

PIL 66/2012

No of visitors

Total

Revenue (INR)

IndianForeigner

1996-97

16715

1677

18382

1,70,062.00

1997-98

17117

2408

19523

21,97,068.00

1998-99

18157

1091

19248

18,02,856.00

1999-00

37496

1623

39319

22,29,291.00

2000-01

50498

1838

52336

30,38,258.00

2001-02

44162

2144

46306

34,94,084.00

2002-03

59811

2055

61866

53,60,425.00

2003-04

57864

3772

61636

61,38,657.00

2004-05

68412

5147

73559

66,75,037.00

2005-06

49116

5210

54326

76,15,169.00

2006-07

67968

5748

73716

79,80,949.00

2007-08

53640

6106

59746

87,34,185.00

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 84 of 402

4.4.1

2008-091003845767

106051

1,12,20,698.00

2009-101052647580

112844

1,21,67,974.00

2010-111123927447

119839

1,36,73,482.00

2011-121174117521

124932

1,49,46,171.00

2011-12

93747

7418

101165

2,05,76,098.00

2013-141215136922

128435

2,68,65,775.00

Jeep Safari:

The Jeep Safari in Kaziranga are run by private operators from the nearby villages. They
have, as of now, been allowed to operate registered Maruti Gypsy soft top with canvass
cover and olive green body color as Jeep safari vehicles on the tourists routes in theCentral, Western, Eastern and Burapahar ranges. There are a total of 208 registeredvehicle. The registration of the vehicles is done annually, and a unique number issued toeach vehicle. The Jeep Safari route circuits are fixed in the four ranges, and the evhicles
are allowed to be plied on on the designated circuits. In case a vehicle owner is found toviolate the terms and conditions, his registration number is canceled for the balance of the
tourist season.
The number of vehicles entering the Park has steadily been increasing. There is a need to
fix the daily quota of vehicles. Further, the vehicles must be monitored for pollution levels.
Though the Park authorities have insisted for pollution certificates from the Jeep safari
owners, it may not actually guarantee pollution free vehicles. These vehicles need to bechecked regularly while entering the Park. Some drivers have also been found ininebriated conditions. Such incidences must be stopped by using breath analysers at thetime of entry. It has also been noticed that some tourists throw chip packets/ water bottles
etc. in the Park. These incidences must also be stopped from happening.
4.5

Human Animal Interface

Population of all the wild animals is on the rise in the Park. Due to anthropogenic activities,
spurt in development and economic activities, Kaziranga is fast becoming an island in thesea of humanity. Explosion of population in surrounding areas has led to fast degradation ofnatural habitat outside the Park in the Kaziranga landscape. Therefore, the spill over
population of wild animals from Kaziranga regularly come in contact with humans. As aresult, life and property of the people on the fringe of the park has been adversely affected.
There have been several incidents of loss of life, accidents and crop and property damages
by wild animals. These incidents are steadily on rise. During 2013, 246 incidents of cattle
depredation by tiger alone were reported. During the last 10 years, 22 persons have losttheir life due to elephant depredation. During 2012-13 financial year, crop damage
compensation paid was Rs. 8,23,000.00.
In the 2nd Stakeholders meeting, the issue of compensation was raised by the local
communities. It was observed that not only the procedure was and cumbersome, theamount of compensation paid was much less compared to the monetary loss suffered by thevillagers.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 85 of 402

4.6

Conclusions

The following are the salient points emerging from the wrte up given above:
1. There are 74 villages in the vicinity of the Kaziranga National Park with a populationof about 65,000 persons.
2. There are 33 registered EDCs, and 26 proposed EDCs in the vicinity of the Park.
3. EDC baseline survey is currently going on.
4. About 85% of the families are found to be marginal and landless farmers
5. More than 55% of the households are daily wage earners.
6. The fringe village populations have been facing a lot of challenges including lack ofamenities.
7. Wild animal depredation is very common, and almost every household is affected byit
8. Tourism is steadily increasing and touched all time high of more than 1,28,000 visitors
in 2013-14.
9. There are 208 registered jeep safari vehicles operated by local populations.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 86 of 402

CHAPTER 5
5

Policy and Law Issues

The key areas covered under this section are:• State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
• Immunity to Forest Staff in using fire arms
• Wildlife crime and conviction• Intelligence and Trans boundary issues• Permissions for UAV flying• Issues of funding• Existing Institutional Mechanisms in Kaziranga• Wildlife laws in International Perspective• A general discourse on Wildlife Crime and Punishment• Rhino Protocols
5.1

State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972

The State Govt. of Assam has done a commendable job by amending certain provisions of
the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 which is a central legislation. The following key
amendments have been made vide the Assam Gazette Notification No. LGL.107/2008/33
Dt. 20Th October, 2010:• “hunting in and outside the boundary” included. This allows for taking cognizance of
wildlife offences outside the PA limits.
• Three years punishment enhanced to seven years, seven years punishment
enhanced to 10 years and fine enhanced from Rupees ten thousand to Rupees fifty
thousand for the first time offenders.
• For the repeat offenders, three years punishment enhanced to ten years, sevenyears punishment enhanced to life imprisonment, and rupees twenty five thousand
fine enhanced to rupees seventy five thousand.
• Offences were made cognizable and non bailable within the meaning of CrPC, 1973
• Bail cannot be granted ex-party• The offences shall be tried by the Court of Sessions of the respective jurisdiction.
5.2

Immunity to Forest Staff in Using Fire Arms

Vide order No. FRW.22/2005 Dt 14th July, 2010, the Govt. of Assam made the following
provisions under the CrPC, 1973:• The provisions of section 197(2) shall apply to all forest officers including membersof the AFPF who are charged with maintenance of public order relating to forest andwildlife protection, conservation and management.
• Only if it is held by an Executive Magistrate through an enquiry that use of fire-arms
have been unnecessary, unwarranted and excessive and such report has been
examined and accepted by the Government, then alone any proceeding including
institution of a criminal case of any nature or affecting an arrest can be initiated by
Police.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 87 of 402

5.3

Provisions of the Sarai Act, 1867

The Sarai Act, 1867 is an Act for the regulation of public Sarais and Puraos. “Sarai” underthe Act means any building used for the shelter and accommodation of travelers. Keeperof sarai includes the owner and any person having or acting in the care or management
thereof. The District magistrate is required to keep a Register of sarais as per the section 4of the Act, and as per section 5 of the Act, lodgers cannot be received in sarais unitl
registered. If a keeper of the sarai is punished three times for violations under this Act, heis barred from running the sarai until he is given a written permission from the Magistrate
to run the sarai.
It appears that none of the hotels and dhabas in and around Kaziranga National Park areregistered under the Sarai Act, nor is there a register of the sarais with the concerned
Deputy Commissioner. If the Act is applicable to Assam, then, even the paying guest
accommodations and eco-tourism accommodations would be required to be registeredunder the Act.
5.4

Wildlife Crime and Prosecution

It is to be noted that once a wildlife crime – primarily poaching of Rhinos – is committed
inside the Park, the rhino horn travels through the human inhabited areas, village roads,
highways and / or railways of these districts to reach neighboring states for international
export. Therefore, the role of police becomes extremely important in curbing down theillegal wildlife trade. In the context of rhino poaching, the following become crucial:(a).
Police does not provide enough priority to such trans national trade.
(b).
Majority of the Police personnel are unaware that the Wildlife law (WPA)
defines duties of police along with forest staff.
(c).Similarly, they are also not aware of the Gazette Notifications of the State whichempowers them under the Act.
(d).
There is virtually no coordination between the enforcement agencies andalso forest department of the neighboring states which are the main conduit routeand homes the majority of the rhino horn traders. Border dispute finds the center
stage as far as coordination is concerned amongst the police forces of Assam andNagaland.
(e).
The Park authorities do not seem to have any reach or means of intelligenceoutside the area of influence of the Park, not to speak of influences outside theState.
(f). The crime scene is not preserved by the field staff. This leads to tampering ofevidence, wiping away of vital finger prints:• As of now, there is no practice of recording finger print from the crime
scene• As of now, there is no practice of collecting sample at the crime scene
for DNA tests of the criminals• Samples for DNA test of the poached rhino are not done
• Use of deep search metal detectors was only started from 2014
• Cast of foot print of the poachers not collected• Detailed photography of the crime scene usually not done
• Map/ sketch of the crime scene is not prepared
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 88 of 402

(g).
Currently no ballistic analysis is being carried out.
(h).
Due to multiple duties, investigation by forest staff is not drawn to any
conclusions.
(i). Since 2009, there is not a single instance of conviction indicating the poor state ofaffairs in wildlife crime detection, enquiry and conviction.
Apart from Police, Railway Protection Force (RPF) and Government Railway Police canplay crucial role in detecting illegal wildlife trade and consignments of wildlife products
travelling through trains but are equally lack understanding of the wildlife crime.
It has also been seen that with changing modus operandi of the criminals, modes oftransport also changes and at times airlines have also been used to transport wildlife
articles from Guwahati to Imphal. Awareness and priority vis-à-vis Central Industrial
Security Force (CISF) and airlines operators themselves is at the lowest for such things totake place right under their control.
Informant Network is an extremely important factor in preventing wildlife crime and within
the Park Staff, use of such network is limited. Networking with public is also very much
important aspect that is lacking at present and makes wildlife crime enforcement that muchdifficult.
There is complete lack of systematic information compilation on poachers, traders, linkmen
and field-men of rhino horn trade. The problem multiplies with virtually no exchange of
information amongst enforcement agencies with regards to wildlife criminals. It has often
been seen that a poacher or a linkman has been arrested but multiple cases pending
against them are not known to the arresting agency. Therefore bail is obtained easily as“first timer” who then gets back to doing the same business.
On the investigation and prosecution front, lack of dedicated investigation and legal teamwithin the command of Park authority, does pose as a constraint as the field staff has toplay multiple roles that eat out valuable time from the protection duty.
5.5Intelligence and Trans-Boundary Issues

It is no denying that rhino poaching has international connotations, and there are long
chains crossing many borders of states and countries. Action within the Park boundaries
may result in only partially eliminating the menace of poaching only by delaying by way of
eliminating poachers, seizure of arms or inflicting injury upon the poachers. The higher
level players in the game do not get affected. The lower rung teams only get assaulted
within the park boundaries. This leaves the main organizers of the crime still free toregroup, have new recruits, provide training, get new arms and make another attempt at
poaching. The efforts inside the Park, must, therefore, be supplemented by equally strong
action outside the Park boundaries.
Several key issues emerge here which must be addressed. Some of these issues are
mentioned below:• Inter-Departmental cooperation, say between Police and Forest is notinstitutionalized and is based on individual relationships

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 89 of 402

•
•
•
•
5.6

Inter-Government cooperation for wildlife crime is relatively new and under-tested
ground. There are no proven institutions and mechanisms to achieve this.
International border issues
Institutionalized assistance from Interpol.
Institutionalized cooperation between agencies such as CBI, Directorate of
Enforcement, Customs, Bureau of Economic Offences, Army Intelligence
Permissions for UAV Flying

The terrain of Kaziranga encompasses river Brahmaputra along with its numerous islands,
water bodies, grasslands, highlands and woodlands. Given the high incidence of poachingin the Park, aerial surveillance is a must. Use of UAVs have been successfully
implemented in South Africa and Chitwan National Park.
The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) was test flied for the first time in Kaziranga from 8 th to13th April, 2013. However, subsequently, further flights had to be canceled due to objection
from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), Govt. of India. Later on the MoD gave clearance tothe Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun to fly UAVs in Panna Tiger Reserve, but
refused to give permissions in Kaziranga.
5.7

Funding Issues

Other than salary component which comes to almost Rs. 13.65 crore annually, thefinancial support received from the Govt. of India and the State Govt. for last threefinancial years is given in the Table below:
SchemeAmount (In Lakh Rupees)
2011-12

2012-132013-14

Project Tiger

316.27243.90550.87

State Plan

39.55

34.86

36.06

Non Plan Scheme

218.95180.13260.89TOTAL

574.77458.89847.82

It is observed that there are inadvertent delays in actual release of funds due to thelengthy procedure of proposal submission, examination, queries, clarifications, interdepartmental consultations/ opinions etc.

After formation of the Kaziranga Tiger Conservation Foundation (KTCF) in 2007, as
mandated under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, there is quite a relief. The Foundation
now receives all the proceeds of the tourism entry fee. In times of crisis, the Park
authorities resort to taking temporary interest free loans from the Foundation to tie over thefinancial difficulties. When the funds are received from the Govt. subsequently, the same isduly refunded back to the foundation.
In addition, the Park receives support in cash and kind from NGOs such as WWF, WTI,
WCT, Aaranyak, WWT, ATREE etc.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 90 of 402

5.8

Existing Institutional Mechanisms in Kaziranga

There are several institutional mechanisms such as the Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP),
Eco-sensitive Zone, Kaziranga Bio-Diversity Conservation And Development Committee(KBCDC) and Local Advisory Committee (LAC).
5.8.1

Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP):

Preparation of the TCP is a statutory requirement under the section 38V of the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, as amended in 2006. The TCP is a legally
enforcing document. In view of the high density tiger presence in the area andreportedly only viable population of tigers in any of the North East India tiger
landscapes, Government of India approved the constitution of Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve vide their communication No. 3-1/2003-PT dated 5 th August 2006.
Government of Assam, accordingly, notiied Kaziranga Tiger Reserve with total
area of 1030 Sq. Km., involving Kaziranga National Park, Additions to KNP,
adjoining Reserve Forests and Laokhowa and Burachapori Wildlife Sanctuaries.
Section 38 V (3) and (4) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 provide forpreparation of Tiger Conservation Plan by the State Government to ensure theproper management of the Tiger Reserve area.
The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, as amended in 2006 states that:“The State Government shall prepare a Tiger Conservation Plan including staf
development and deployment plan for the proper management of each area so
as to ensure• Protection of tiger reserve and providing site speciic habitat inputs for a
viable population of tigers, co-predators and prey animals without
distorting the natural prey-predator ecological cycle in the habitat.
• Ecologically compatible land uses in the tiger reserves and areas linking
one protected areas or tiger reserve with another for addressing the
livelihood concerns of local people, so as to provide dispersal habitats
and corridor for spill over population of wild animals from the designatedcore areas of tiger reserves or from tiger breeding habitats within otherprotected areas.
• The forestry operations of regular forest divisions and those adjoining
tiger reserves are not incompatible with the needs of tiger conservation.
The National Tiger Conservation authority is mandated to approve the Tiger
Conservation Plan of Tiger Reserves”
In view of the above the draft Tiger Conservation Plan for the Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve has been prepared and sent to NTCA. The NTCA has suggested for somefurther modifications. The TCP, accordingly is under revision, and would be submitted to
NTCA again for approval.
5.8.2

ECO SENSITIVE ZONE:

Purpose of declaring Eco-sensitive Zones:
The purpose of declaring Eco-sensitive Zones around the National Park andsanctuaries is to create some kind of Shock Absorber for the Protected Areas.
They would also act as a transition zone from areas of high protection to areas
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 91 of 402

of lesser protection. As has been decided by the National Board of Wildlife, theactivities in the Eco-sensitive zones would be regulatory in nature rather
prohibitive nature, unless and otherwise so required.
Extent of Eco-sensitive zones:
Many of the existing protected areas have already undergone tremendous
development in close vicinity to their boundaries. Some of the Protected areas
actually lying in the urban setup. Therefore the determination of the zonation is
kept lexible and PA speciic. The width of the Eco-sensitive Zones and types ofregulation may difer from PA to PA. However, as a general principle the widthof the Eco-sensitive zone could go upto 10 km around the Protected area asprovided in the Wildlife Conservation Strategy-2002.
Procedure adopted :It is pre-requisite that an inventory of the diferent land use patterns and thediferent types of activities, types and numbers of industries operating aroundeach of the protected areas as well as corridor be made. For this purpose asmall committee comprising the concerned Wildlife Warden, an Ecologist, anoicial from the Revenue Department of the concerned areas could be formed.
The Chief Wildlife Warden could group the activities under the following
categories:• Prohibited• Restricted with safeguards.
• Permissible
Once the proposal for Eco-sensitive zone has been inalized, the same may be
forwarded to the MoEF for further processing and notiication.
Kaziranga Eco-sensitive Zone (KEZ)
The Kaziranga Eco-sensitive Zone (hereafter KEZ) is proposed to consist of thefollowing areas:I)National Park- Kaziranga National Park (KNP)
1. First addition to KNP
2. Second addition to KNP
3. Third addition to KNP
4. Fourth addition to KNP
5. Fifth addition to KNP
6. Sixth addition to KNPII) Reserve Forests:• Panbari Reserve Forest• Kukurakata Reserve Forest• Bagser Reserve Forest• Kamakhya Reserve Forest• Deosur proposed Reserve Forest
III) Adjacent areas of KNP: Civil area under EAWL& Nagaon Forest DivisionIV) Parts of Karbi Anglong District in the vicinity of KNP

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 92 of 402

Total area of the proposed KEZ is 1326 sq. km (approx)
The Draft proposal for Kaziranga Eco-sensitive Zone has been submitted to the Govt. ofIndia.
5.8.3

Kaziranga Bio-Diversity Conservation And Development Committee

The Kaziranga Bio-diversity Conservation and Development Committee(KBCDC) was constituted on 1st December, 2008 by the order of the Governorof Assam to examine the matter in holistic manner and also suggest in respectof infrastructural development for better conservation of wildlife along withfurther development and maintenance of proper bio-diversity in the world
heritage site of Kaziranga. The Committee is headed by the Hon'ble Minister,
Env & Forest, Govt. of Assam.
A Sub-Committee was constituted on 19th June, 2009 which would delve into
the matter of growth of tourism zone around Kaziranga National Park andrelated uncontrolled infrastructure development and other connected and /orincidental activities, their impact on KNP ecosystem and protection of its wild
inhabitants. The Committee would suggest measures including legislation to
streamline infrastructure development and other connected and /or incidental
activities and conservation and protection of KNP bio-diversity as well as
promotion of sustainable tourism beitting status of KNP as World Heritage Site.
The Principal Secretary, Env. & Forest, Govt. of Assam chairs the subcommittee.
After its inception The Kaziranga Bio-diversity Conservation and Development
Committee met ive times:
1. 5th February, 2009- held at the oice chamber of the Hon'ble Minister
Environment and Forest Department, Assam, Guwahati.
2. 31st August, 2009- held at Assam State Zoo, Guwahati.
3. 6th October, 2010- held at Kaziranga National Park.
4. 29th December, 2010- held at Kaziranga National Park.
5. 4th January, 2012-held at Kaziranga National Park.
Various important deliberations of the Committee and the Sub Committee areare briely enumerated here:Meeting

Decisions/ Deliberations

1st Meeting

The Chairperson explained the impact of
uncontrolled
tourism,
infrastructuredevelopment on the ecosystem of Kaziranga
National Park.
The PCCF talked about creating a tourism
zone with the help of legislation
The Chairperson proposed constitution of a Sub Committee constituted
sub committee to look into the issues of on 19th June, 2009
infrastructure development and regulation of

PIL 66/2012

Action Points

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 93 of 402

such activities
2nd Meeting Revenue officials survey showed presence(1st Meeting of 1200 dhabas, hotels an dresorts. NOC
of the Sub issued
from
gram
panchayats.
No
Committee) permission under Sarai Act was given.
It was decided to issue show cause notice Action: Revenue Deptt.
for violation of rules (for change of land usetype) and cancellation of patta in case therespondent did not respond.
For changing land use, NOC to be obtained
from KNP authority
Draft Vision of KNP to include socio-cultural, Action: Forest Deptt
demography, livelihood alternatives andincome security issues.
Creation of a new Regulatory Body with new
set of rules to deal with emerging hazardous
development trends
Exploring the possibility of making KBCDC apermanent body
3rd Meeting Notices to encroachers on Govt land to be(2nd meeting issued.
of the Sub Before
givingpermissionforanyCommittee) construction related to hospitality sector i.e.
hotels, dhabas, resorts etc. under the Sarai
Act, NOC from Director KNP to be obtained.
Any unauthorized establishment coming up
in the natural corridors should be stopped
and action be taken for its removal. Old
constructions should be mapped andreviewed and the best measure to overcome
the the problem of animal corridor should beworked out and action taken accordingly
after due compliance with rules andprocedures.
The Director KNP suggested dividing thearea in question into zones no or varying
degree of development to be finalized jointly
by the Revenue and Forest officials.
It was decided to make a request to the
Hon'ble Chief Minister the parts of karbi
Anglong to be included in the landscape of
KNP.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 94 of 402

Unauthorized construction detected within aperiod of 60 days from this meeting would be
stopped forthwith by concerned officers.
All encroachment cases must be cleared
within a period of two months.
Draft Rules for regulating various activities inthe vicinity of KNP to be made ready andpresented before the Committee within aperiod of two months.For zoning of areas, aphysical map be prepared and brought in thenext meeting
4th Meeting If Eco-sensitive Zone proposal did not(3rd Meeting include karbi Anglong areas, or did not haveof the Sub enough regulatory provisions, the same
Committee) should be withdrawn from the Govt of India
and resubmitted. Revised proposal shouldbe placed before the Sub Committee.
The Kaziranga National Park management
to place before the sub committee all its
recommendationsforregulating
infrastructure development adjacent to thePark.
5th Meeting It was noted by the members that the Ecos(4th Meeting sensitive zone will not be only a timeof the Sub consuming process but also would not takeCommittee) care of all the challenges faced by the KNP.
After deliberation, the members felt that the
only option left was to enact a specific pieceoflegislation
aimed
atregulating
uncontrolled,haphazard
growthofinfrastructure and commercial land use in
greater Kaziranga. This legislation should beso drafted that it can address all the diverse
issues confronting Kaziranga such aschanging land use, issues concerning riverand road safety etc.

A proposal may be moved for seeking inprincipal approval of the Govt. of assam forbringing a draft legislation “Assam Land Use
Regulation Act for Greater Kaziranga”.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 95 of 402

The task should be assigned to Sri LC
Singhi IAS (Retd) for drafting the legislationin about 30 days time. Sri. SR Bardhan ACS,SDO(C), Kaliabor and Sri R.G. Garawad
IFS, DFO, WAWL, Tezpur to assist SriSinghi. Funds to be provided from the KTCF
for honorarium and logistic support. The
KBCD to approve the legislation.
NOC granted by Kaziranga authorities:
As per the decisions of the KBCD, all sale permissions in and around Kaziranga
National Park require a No Object Certiicate (NOC) from the Director, Kaziranga
National Park. So far 24 NOCs have been issued by the Director, Kaziranga
National Park all within the Kaliabor Civil Sub Division. Out of these, 21 NOCs
have been granted on conditions of “No Change of Land Use”. Only in threecases for which NOCs were issued on the 21 st of August, 2012, were directly
given to developers and involved change to commercial land use, but it statedthat “Land has been used by wild animals”.
So far, 50 applications for NOC are pending with Director, Kaziranga National
Park, mostly belonging to Mauza Duarbagori in Kaliabor Civil Sub Division. The
the NOCs issued and a list of pending applications has recently been uploadedon the new portal of Kaziranga namely http://kaziranga.assam.gov.in.
5.8.4 Local Advisory Committee
Local Advisory Committee is a statutory body and was constituted under
section 38o (1) (c) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. It has the following
functions:• to review the tourism strategy with respect to the tiger reserve and makerecommendation to the State Government.
• to ensure computation of reserve speciic carrying capacity and its
implementation through periodic reviews.
• to ensure site speciic norms on buildings and infrastructure in areas
inside and close to KTR keeping in view the corridor value and ecologicalaesthetics.
• To advise local self Government and State Government on issues relating
to development of tourism in and around KTR.
• To monitor regularly (at least half yearly) all tourist facilities in andaround tiger reserve vis-a -vis environmental clearances, area ofcoverage, ownership, type of construction, number of employee, etc, forsuggesting mitigation and retroitting measures if needed.
• To monitor regularly activities of tour operators to ensure that they do notcause disturbance to animals while taking visitors into the KTR.
• To encourage tourism industry to augment employment opportunities for membersof local communities.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 96 of 402

The Committee is chaired by the Divisional Commissioner, Upper Assam Division, Jorhat
and has the three Deputy Commissioners of Golaghat, nagaon and Sonitpur as members
along with the concerned DFOs, local MLA and other local stakeholders.
The LAC sat on the 6th November, 2013 for the first time and the following key decisions
were arrived at:• The Govt. land reserved for Kaziranga National Park, north of NH37 will beidentified by the concerned authorities and handed over to Kaziranga National Parkfor creating highlands.
• The Committee decided to constitute a sub committee to formulate a strategy tostop change of land use pattern.
• The Chairperson suggested to draft a document to constitute a development
authority and related legislation to monitor the land use pattern and development in
the fringe areas of Kaziranga Tiger Reserved• The members expressed serious concern over mushrooming of dhabas and theirbarrier effect on animal crossing during floods. The Chairperson suggested thatconcerned revenue authorities would examine legal aspect of their presence along
NH37 and take necessary action.
5.8.5 Committee on De-horning of Rhinos in Assam
The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) & Chief Wildlife Warden, Assam vide
Notification No. 970 Dt. 11Th February, 2014 notified a 10 member committee to ascertain
the feasibility and necessity for de-horning of translocated rhinos in Assam. The Terms ofReference of the Committee included among others:••••

The committee will decide whether de-horning will be a viable option to meet thegoal of setting up a new population from among the translocated rhinos by ensuring
their safety from poachers for an initial period of 10 years.
The committee will examine the veterinary implications, if any, that may arise due tode-horning, by consulting various sources, national and international.
The committee should take opinion from the public by providing them atleast 7 days
to time to respond over email or general mail to an identified address. The call for
public opinion in written form should be advertised through Janasanjog in atleast
one widely circulated English and Assamese daily...
The committee will submit their report within 3 months from the date of thisnotification.

The intentions of the committee were largely misunderstood by the public and media, as if
rhinos of Kaziranga re going to be d-horned, and it led to a huge public outcry and criticism
of the Government. The committee has come of the view that de-horning was not apractical solution at all; and hence, did nor recommend the same.
5.8.6

Committee for Preparation of Comprehensive Rhino Conservation Plan for
Assam

A Committee was constituted by the PCCF (WL) and the Chief Wildlife Warden, Assamvide his office order No. 977 Dtd. 08.02.2014 for preparation of a comprehensive rhinoconservation plan for Assam. The 1 st meeting of the Committee was held on the 4 th May,PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 97 of 402

2014. The Committee carried out a SWOT analysis of the rhino conservation in Assam.
Some of the salient decisions taken by the Committee are as mentioned below:• All rhino bearing park managers will prepare PA specific rhino conservation planpertaining to their PA with proper justification on the requirements for the Pas under
their control in consultation with NGOs/ Researchers/ Academic institutions whererequired.
• Data on existing manpower, infrastructure, census figures to be provided by the PA
managers.
• The Plan would cover initially a period of 10 years (3 years short term and 10 years
long term)
5.8.7

Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force (ARPTF)

The Govt. of Assam, vide their order No. FRW.2/2014/2 Dt. 16 Th May, 2014 constituted the“Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force” a Special Task Force under the overall supervision of
the Addl DG (P), STF, Assam with the three Superintendents of Police of Golaghat,
Nagaon, Sonitpur and Karbi Anglong districts along with the Park authorities. The Director,
Kaziranga National Park is a member of the ARPTF.
The Task Force has already started its operations in the last week of May, 2014 as manyas 15 arrests of poachers were made by police and forest personnel in a series ofcommando based raids.
5.9

Wildlife laws in International Perspective

Internationally one finds that rhinoceros bearing areas are confined to South Africa andsome other neighbouring countries such as Kenya, Zimbabwe, Malawi etc in the African
continent, India, Nepal and Indonesia in the Asian continent. The rhino poaching issues
are very alarming in the African countries. However, for past couple of years, poachingseems to have been brought under control in Chitwan National Park in Nepal. Each of therhino bearing countries have their own enactments for protection of the rhinos. Its worth
learning lessons from some of these.
5.9.1

Nepal Enactment on Wildlife Conservation

The Government of Nepal enacted the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 2029
(1973). The Act defines various conservation entities such as National Park, Strict nature
Reserve, Wildlife Reserve, Hunting Reserve and Reserve, Conservation Area and Buffer
Zone.
Under section 26 (1), the wildlife offenses are punishable with fine of Rs. Fifty to one
hundred thousand rupees and or imprisonment ranging from five to 15 years or both.
Under section 27, the accomplices would get half the punishment given to the principal
offender. Another major step taken by the Nepal Govt. which is worth emulating in Assam,
especially in Kaziranga, is that the Govt in Nepal has awarded magisterial powers to theChief Warden (equivalent to the Field Director/ Director) and the DFOs to sentence culpritscaught with evidence of involvement in poaching or trafficking in wildlife parts, andsentence them to jail terms. The convicted persons would have to appeal their cases
through regular courts either to get relief or have their sentences reduced or confirmed.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 98 of 402

This tremendously helps in keeping offenders from indulging in crimes repeatedly, unlike in
Assam where poachers are almost free to continue poaching after out on bail.
Though the Royal Chitwan National Park is patrolled by the Army, there are issues incoordination, monitoring and management. When the Army units change, the Park
authorities have to start afresh everything they did with the previous unit. There are often
issues of law and order in the fringe villages who once in a while fall victim to Army
excesses.
5.9.2

South Africa/ Kenya Enactments on Wildlife Conservation

The enactments of South Africa and Kenya seem to be very elaborate and encompass theentire gamut of wildlife conservation. The Acts define such terms as “conservation area”,“corridor”, “dealer”, “ecosystem”, “endangered ecosystem”, “habitat”, “invasive species”,“national park”, “protected area”, “threatened ecosystem”, “wildlife conservancy”, “wildlife
conservation area” etc. Another feature worth mentioning is the provision of “conservation
orders” and easements for private participation in conservation by way of which a
landowner may enter into agreement with conservancy agencies to further the cause of
wildlife conservation.
The Act provides for use of fire arms by the members of the Kenya Wildlife Service, underconditions which are worth noting:1. in the course of law enforcement against—• any person charged with an offence punishable under this Act, when that
person is escaping or attempting to escape lawful custody;• any person who, by force, removes or attempts to remove any other personfrom lawful custody;• any person who, by force, attempts to prevent the lawful arrest of himself or
any other person; or• any person unlawfully hunting any wildlife using a firearm;
2. in self-defense or in defense of another officer or other person;
3. for the protection of people and property against any animal causing destruction tohuman life or crops or livestock or property;
4. for the protection and safety of visitors against banditry or animals;
5. in the course of problem animal control; and6. wildlife veterinary activities.
The Act provides a series of punishment for varied wildlife crime which include:• Offences against “Management Plan”• Whoever contravenes a management plan
• Whoever fraudulently alters a management plan
• punishment: fine 500,000 shillings and or imprisonment for 2 or moreyears
• Whoever introduces “invasive species” in a wildlife conservation area
• punishment: fine 300,000 shillings and or imprisonment for 1 year or more
• Possession of wildlife trophy illegally invites 100,000 shillings fine and or
imprisonment not less than 5 years• Whoever hunts for bush-meat
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 99 of 402

•

•

•

• punishment: fine 200,000 shillings and or imprisonment for 1 year or more
Whoever illegally exports or imports wildlife species• punishment: fine 10,000,000 shillings and or imprisonment for 5 years or
more
Whoever makes a false statement / claim before a Service officer,• punishment: fine 100,000 shillings and or imprisonment for six months or
more
Whoever enters without permission into a national park, carries arms,, causes fireetc.
• punishment: fine 200,000 shillings and or imprisonment for 2 years or more

These Acts are comprehensive as they deal with environment, forests and wildlife, wildlife
service, conservation, wildlife endowment fund, wildlife and conservation easements andinternational treaties/ CITES etc. There also appears to be a single chain of command for
implementation of the Acts. The Act itself empowers the Service personnel to fly their own
aircrafts over the parks and conservation areas and at the same time prohibits other flights
crossing/ hovering/ landing in such areas.
Some of the documents, which were examined by the author, for filing of offence reports
pertaining to wildlife, clearly indicate that each section that has been violated needs to bementioned exclusively giving details of the offenders.
5.10

Crime and Punishment

Criminal jurisprudence has a long history and can be traced back to treatises such as
Manu Smriti, or even to Aristotle and Plato. However, what is remarkably different today
than the days when the foundation of criminal jurisprudence must have been laid down.
Crimes against society or State or Sovereign were acts against another individual or
threatened the orderly manners of the society or State. Crime against mother nature andwildlife and forestry is a crime against society or State, and as such it did find adequate
place in ancient criminal jurisprudence. Kautilya's Arthshashtra does talk of even deathpunishment who hunt in nature reserves kept for the exclusive use by the royalty or on
killing of animals such as elephants. Crime against man such as murder and rape areseen as the most heinous crimes in society and there are provisions for highest degree ofpunishment to the culprits. Crime against nature, forestry, environment and wildlife islargely seen as crime which can largely be settled by fines or at best few years of
imprisonment. However, the larger questions remains to be examined whether crime
against nature weighs heavier or crime against man. Who's crime weighs heavier Mr. A
guilty of killing a rhinoceros in cold blood in the wild habitats of Kaziranga or that of Mr. B
charged with murdering a man? To my mind modern criminal jurisprudence does not havean answer to this, as its evolved from crime against man and society in the times whenenvironment or ecosystems were not threatened, or there were no ozone holes or there
were no threats from green house gases or biodiversity was not threatened or atleast
perceived to be plenty and replenishable. The foundations of modern jurisprudence werelaid when there was no threat to human civilization from climate change threatened byanthropogenic activities. The foundations of modern jurisprudence were laid when hunting
wildlife for food and sport was as common as killing pests and vermins. Cutting a forestand encroaching upon it and settling down there is no crime when compared withslaughter of people in several villages. Cutting of forests that sustain the ecological
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 100 of 402

balance in nature, disruption of which would actually murder the whole society silently inthe distant future is only a crime which can at best be dispensed with fines and a few yearsof imprisonment at best. The criminal jurisprudence does not realize that there are crimes
that erode the very root of existence of all civilizations on this earth silently, and thesecrime are far more heinous than murder. Who would be responsible if the river Ganges
dries tomorrow and there is not a drop of water in it? Is any one responsible for the dirty
and muddy waters of the river Yamuna? What if the river Brahmaputra becomes a bed ofdesert in a century to come, just because the people wantonly cut and settled on he hillslopes? Who can be punished for crimes for which the entire society shall have to pay
dearly? The question is that if Kaziranga were to disappear from the face of the earth, or
the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros were to be extinct, can any amount of moneys andpenalties get them back? If the answer is yes, then probably modern criminal
jurisprudence can sustain itself in the manner it stands today. But if the answer is no, thenwho in society is responsible for heinous crimes as death of the Brahmaputra or extinctionof the rhino or incessant floods that would pester every now and then? To my mind,
criminal jurisprudence needs to be re-looked when one is talking of crime against nature,environment, forests and wildlife. Such crimes must, to my mind, be described as mostheinous such s crime against the whole society, and must carry severe-most punishments
possible. Crime against man, an animal which is found in great abundance and one who islargely responsible for destroying nature and ecosystems, must take a back seat whencrime against mother nature is on the examination table. Criminal laws pertaining toviolation of environment, pollution, wildlife and forestry must be re-framed under a newcriminal jurisprudence that sets apart such crimes as the ones that must be nipped in the
bud at the slightest pretext, else the existence of the whole humanity would be at stake.
The Wildlife (Protection)(Assam Amendment) Act, 2009 promulgated by the Governmentof Assam gains considerable significance as a new leaf in criminal jurisprudence pertaining
to crime against nature and wildlife. However, a lot more is required to be done so thatcriminals of rhino poaching get the most severe punishments. In the sections below, three
key issues namely provisions of bail, life imprisonment and wild animal rights have been
discussed.
5.10.1 BailThe concept of bail in criminal jurisprudence is significant by which a criminal is allowed tocome back to society by furnishing “guarantees” or “sureties” or “bonds” that would ensure
his presence before the trail court or any other authority if required. The main reasons forrefusing bail according to the Bail Act 1976 are that there are substantial grounds forbelieving that the defendant (1) will abscond; (2) will commit further offences whilst on bail;or (3) will interfere with witnesses. It has been observed that the trial courts award bail torhino poachers who come back and again start poaching.
The question here is whether human freedom is more important or preventing therhinoceros from extinction at any cost. Though in denying bail, there could be questions ofcertain rights or even questions of natural justice or even question of denying justice, but
all such considerations should not overweigh the fact that even to think (mens rea) to kill arhinoceros or to plan or to collude in planning or making preparations to kill a rhinoceros
are fraught with great dangers to the society's existence on this earth. Therefore, criminals
brought before the trial courts, must not be given bail as a matter of one of the very basic
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 101 of 402

principles of criminal jurisprudence pertaining to crime against nature, environment forestry
and wildlife. The arguments that “the object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative,
deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, the courts owe more than verbal
respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, that that every man isdeemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty, that detention in custody
pending completion of trial could be a cause of great hardship, and that that any
imprisonment before conviction has a substantial punitive content and it would be improper
for any Court to refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of former conduct whether theaccused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an un-convicted person for the
purpose of giving him a taste of imprisonment as a lesson” are very good for crimes
committed against man, but not against nature, environment, forestry and wildlife. Whatuse is that liberty that can endanger the very existence of civilization or that can drive a
species to extinction? Further, criminal justice against environment, forestry and wildlife
cannot be said to be complete as there is no one to speak on behalf of the poor trees andanimals who cannot express their agony by engaging a learned counsel. Therefore, thebenefit of doubt must tilt towards them who can never be represented in a court of law.
Bail has bee provided for under Section 436 of the CrPC, 1973. Under the Section 437(3),it is clearly laid down as follows:
When a person accused or suspected of the commission of an offence punishable
with imprisonment which may extend to seven years or more or of an offence under
Chapter VI, Chapter XVI or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code(45 of 1860) or
abetment of, or conspiracy or attempt to commit, any such offence, is released onbail under sub-section (1), the Court may impose any condition which the Court
considers necessary(a) in order to ensure that such person shall attend in accordance with theconditions of the bond executed under this Chapter, or(b) in order to ensure that such person shall not commit an offence similar to theoffence of which he is accused or of the commission of which he is suspected, or(c) otherwise in the interests of justice.
The question remains as to how the provisions of the Section 437(3)(b) be enforced by thetrial court, so that a person released on bail does not again get engaged in either planningor colluding or actually killing/ attempting to kill (actus reus) a rhino? What are thoseconditions that a court can impose upon an accused released on bail to enforce theprovisions of Section 437(3)(b)?
There is provision of anticipatory bail under section 438 of the CrPC. However, when thecrime involved is likely to be crime against nature, environment, forestry and wildlife, bailought to be refused, as these are extra-ordinary crimes. The criminal jurisprudence needs
to be modified/ amended to deal with such crimes sternly. The reason being that the law
makers of the yore never could have realized that environment and ecosystems which arelife supporting could have been threatened by criminal activities of mankind. Nature has
always been thought to be perpetual, in abundance and never ceasing. All theseassumptions do not hold today. If the mankind behaves properly and pays the price for its
wrong doings in the past, chances are that humans may continue to inhabit the earth for a
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 102 of 402

little less than the time when the sun shall suck the earth into its mantle, or overwhelm theplanet with its extra-ordinary heat, and that would be still more than 3.5 billion years fromnow. However, if we continue to abuse our environment, forests, wildlife and ecosystems,
chances are bright that human race may not even last a century, what to speak of a billion
or even a million years. Therefore, its time that a new criminal jurisprudence is brought topractice to firmly deal with crime pertaining to environment, forestry and wildlife.
5.10.2 Life Imprisonment
The Wildlife (Protection) (Assam Amendment) Act, 2009 has in a single stroke laid thefoundations of a new criminal jurisprudence for crimes pertaining to wildlife in Assam, bymodifying a central Act, namely the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. Therefore, this piece oflegislation becomes original in thought, seminal and historic. The minimum imprisonment
term prescribed has been amended to ”seven years” from the original “three years”; andfor a second and subsequent offence, the imprisonment term prescribed has been
amended to “life imprisonment” from the original “seven years”.
Therefore, it becomes very important to dwell upon “life imprisonment” for a while. It has
been learnt that the courts in South Africa and Kenya are inflicting imprisonment even upto
29 years in case of wildlife offences. In India, the Assam amendment is the only enactmentthat provides for “life imprisonment” in subsequent wildlife crimes. However, there has
always been confusion as to what constitutes a life imprisonment. In common parlance, aminimum term of 14 years in jail is broadly seen as life imprisonment, as the term is
nowhere defined. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, of late, has issued certain clear cut
directions in this regard, which are worth noting. The Supreme Court has ruled that inmurder cases the convict sentenced to life imprisonment cannot claim any automatic rightto be released after serving a minimum 14 years sentence, except under extraordinary
Constitutional provisions. The apex court further held that in case of life imprisonment, aconvict should serve a minimum of 14 years imprisonment. A bench of Justices Altamas
Kabir and Cyriac Joseph made the remarks while directing Chattisgarh government toensure that the convict Ramraj sentenced to life imprisonment serves at least a minimumof 20 years. "In the various decisions rendered after the decision in Godse's case,'imprisonment for life' has been repeatedly held to mean imprisonment for the natural life
term of a convict, though the actual period of imprisonment may stand reduced on accountof remissions earned. But in no case, with the possible exception of the powers vested in
the President under Article 72 of the Constitution and the power vested in the Governor
under Article 161 of the Constitution, even with remission earned can a sentence ofimprisonment for life be reduced to below 14 years," the apex court said.
Therefore, two things are very clear that life imprisonment cannot be less than 14 years inany case; and that life imprisonment means term for life, unless certain express conditions
are invoked. It is well known that clemency of the highest offices of the Governors of theStates and the President of India is sought by relatives of such convicts. There is also apractice that on certain occasions such as the Independence Day or the Republic Day,
offences of such criminals gets commuted, or certain prisoners are freed.
Though no one has yet been brought to book even once under the Wildlife (Protection)(Assam Amendment) Act, 2009, there are good chances that a few of the cases may evenreach this stage. In course of time, it would become important to ensure that criminals
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 103 of 402

convicted of life imprisonment do not have chances of getting their terms commuted on
any ground. This would make the foundations of a new criminal jurisprudence pertaining tocrimes against environment, forestry and wildlife more solid and capable of ensuring thatthe very basic fabric of life support systems are not damaged in the least by criminals.
5.10.3 Environment, Forestry Wildlife Rights“Human Rights” is a very well understood as a super crime against humanity, and carries
grave consequences of its violation, especially for erring officials and institutions, including
the Governments. The question is what rights are violated when a stream dried up forgood? Or when a river ceases to carry clean water in its folds and started to transport
polluted water? Or when ground water gets so heavily exploited that it pumps out only
arsenic? Or who shall be responsible when a group of people have cleared the forests anddeprived the wildlife of their life support system? Who is to be held responsible forencroaching upon the land that once rightfully belonged to the elephants and rhinoceros?
Who would adjudicate if crime against wildlife and forestry is committed, and who would
speak for the mute animals and trees; and who would ensure that human justice is nottotally biased against the wildlife and forests? Therefore, there is a good case for aEnvironment, Forestry and Wildlife Rights Commission who speak for the cause of those
who cannot speak.
Though Nepal Govt. has already set an extra-ordinary example in this regard by declaring
their Chief Wardens and DFOs as magistrates who can pass sentences of fine andimprisonment, against which the accused is free to file an appeal in an appropriate court oflaw. This is also what we need to do in India. Of course those arguing against the motion
would be saying loudly, how can “you be a judge in your own case?” My argument is that a
Forest Officer passing judgment and imposing imprisonment as punishment in case theaccused is found guilty is not a judge in his own cause. If necessary, the new system of
Nepal needs to be studied and a sound system of legal remedy in the first instance itself
needs to be devised so that criminals perpetrating heinous crimes against environment,
forests and wildlife are brought to book speedily.
Protectors can also turn criminals. In this case, the environment laws of Kenya have alesson or two to be learnt. Violations of approved Management Plans or Tiger
Conservation Plans (TCP) would be criminal and those responsible for it must be brought
to book. The Forest officers at higher level can be empowered to inflict punishment, if
lower ranks are found to be involved in such infringements. However, if the Government as
a whole, is responsible for its lackadaisical attitude and indifference, then this becomes a
fit case to be tried before the Environment, Forestry and Wildlife Rights Commission.
Whatever the case be, or the institutional arrangements or systems of governance thebasic principle should remain the same that crime against environment, forests and wildlife
are the worst of crimes, and nothing can be more serious than these, not even humanrights violations; and ever if a question arises as to which rights shall get higher priority, it
shall not be the human rights. Else the doom of mankind is writ large, and no one has thepower to stop it.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 104 of 402

5.11

Rhino Protocols

Currently there are too few protocols on rhino nd its various facets of management andadministration. Rhino being restricted to few geographical areas such as South Africa,
Kenya, Zimbabwe, Malawi etc in the African continent, parts of India (Assam, north Bengal
and Dudhwa), Nepal and Indonesia, it is the responsibility of these countries andgovernments to define the systems and protocols for appropriate and scientificmanagement and administration of the rhino bearing areas. The Government of Assamhas constituted a committee vide order No. 979 Dt. 18 Th February, 2014 in the office of the
PCCF(Wildlife) & Chief Wildlife Warden, Assam, to develop a Standard Operating Protocol
for Rescue of Stray Rhinos. The committee is yet to submit its recommendations.
There are several areas where protocols are required, though some sort of ad hoc
management is in place. NTCA has come up with excellent protocols on tigers startingfrom census to reporting a death of a tiger. Similarly for rhinos, the good practices acrossthe rhino bearing areas and depending upon local conditions, local laws and suitability ofthe methods, needs to be assembled together into Standard Operating Procedure/Protocols; and if possible these should be made enforcible by law, wherever required,especially death of a rhino, stockpile and custody of rhino horns, disposal of toe nails etc.
The crime scene investigation of a rhino poaching ought to be handled through a standard
protocol. An attempt has been made to present a few of such protocols in the Part II of thisReport (which have been compiled based on inputs received from experts and or
stakeholders)
5.12

Conclusions

The following are the salient points of the discussion above:
1. The State amendment of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 has given altogether a
new dimesion to the wildlife crime, hitherto unkown. However, it requires further
amendments to give it more teeth.
2. The forest staff has now immunity in using fire arms
3. The provisions of Sarai Act has not been implemented
4. There are several lacunae in wildlife crime investigation and prosecution
5. There are limitations and issues in intelligence gathering and trans-boundary
cooperation
6. The Ministry of Defence has refused permission to Kaziranga to fly UAVs.
7. The fund allocation is very meager.
8. There are recommendations by the KBCDC and the LAC to form an Authority toregulate development around Kaziranga.
9. There are international best practices to learn from.
10. The wildlife jurisprudence needs a fresh thinking.
11. Protocols on rhino are lacking.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 105 of 402

CHAPTER 6
6

Rhino Population Dynamics

This Chapter initially provides a brief description of rhinoceros, followed by world
population. Thereafter, it describes briefly the rhino population in Kaziranga National Park.
6.1

About Rhinoceros In Brief

The word 'Rhinoceros' is a combination of two Greek words - Rhino means nose andKeros means horn, that is a creature with horn on its nose. Fossils discovered in many
locations in North America, Europe, Africa and Asia confirms the first appearance of Rhino
like animals i.e. Hyrachus on earth 60-40 million years ago. Its size was somewhat
between that of a large dog and a horse. After 20-30 million years Hyrachus developed
long slender legs with three toes on each foot and were known as Hyracodon. A lot morechanges occurred in the Rhino throughout the period. Around one million year ago the
Rhino like animal was called as Coelodonta, i.e. wooly rhinoceros.
Geological upheavals, climatic changes as well as biotic factors have ensured that most of
the several dozen genera of the family Rhinocerotidae have become extinct. At present
there are only five species in the world, two in Southern & Eastern Africa and threein tropical Asia. All five extant species today are also threatened with extinction due tointerference by man. Due to its present status it has been included in the Appendix-I of
CITES and Indian Rhino has been included in the schedule-I of Wildlife (Protection) Act,1972.
• The African White or Squaretipped Rhinoceros (Caratotherium simum):
Average weight is 3.6 tons and average shoulder height is 198 cm. The actual
colour is grey. White word comes from the African word 'Weit" i.e. wide square
mouth of the animal. It is the biggest [Comments by Richard Emslie: NO it is not thelargest - the White rhino (or possible GOH) is the largest rhino. BR are quite a bit
smaller than WR and GOH Rhino. There is not much to chose between GOH andWhites in terms of size. ] of all the five Rhinos and also the second largest terrestrial
mammal after the elephant. It has two horns on its nose, anterior one larger thanthe posterion. Only male has horns. It is a grazer.
• The African Black Rhino (Diceros bicornis): Average weight 1.5 to 2.0 tons andshoulder height is 160 to 170 cm. It has two horns. It is a browser.
• The Asiatic two Horned or Sumatran Rhino (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis): Theaverage weight is 0.85 to 1.0 ton and shoulder height 120 to 130 cm. It is thesmallest of the five, and population is around 100. Being two horned it forms a link
between Asiatic and African Rhino. It is the only Rhino, which has hair on its body.
[Comments by Richard Emslie: the Sumatran is the hairiest by far and hair can bevisible on its flanks but other rhinos can also have hair even at very sparsedensities. BR and WR also have hair on the tips of their ears ]• The lesser One Horned or Javan Rhino (Rhinoceros sondaicus): The average
weight is around 1.5 to 1.3 tons and shoulder height is 160-175 cm. It has a single
horn. It is currently confined to only one population.
• The Great Indian One Horned Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis): The average
weight is 2.0 tons and shoulder height 170-180 cm. Male & female both has horn
and also of almost equal length. The horn length is 35- 40 cm. It is a mixed feeder.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 106 of 402

Fossil remnants show that all the 3 species of Asiatic Rhino were to be found in India in theprehistoric past. Asiatic species have heavy folds on their body in comparison to African
ones. Though the skin of Greater One Horned Rhino like the others is unusually thick &seems to be impenetrable, in reality it is quite soft and is easily cut by a knife or penetrated.
Rhino's vision is extremely poor but sense of hearing and smell are acute. In Indian Rhinos
it is very difficult to distinguish a male from a female, but the female skull is slightly thinnerand base of the horn narrower and horn slimmer. The horn of rhino is not a true horn
because it does not have a core of bone. Instead it is a compact mass of keratin fibres, notfixed to the skull, but resting on a bony cushion. The rhinos could be browse, grazer or
having mixed feeding habits. [Comments by Richard Emslie: Not all are browsers. The whiterhino is a grazer. The black is a browser and GOH a mixed feeder eating browse and grass.
White rhino also do not only favour open areas as the broadleaved, highly palatable andfavoured Panicum maximum and Panicum deustum grasses are found growing under tree
canopies.] i.e. However, the GOH rhino was more adapted to live in woodlands. It was
restricted to the alluvial plains of mega Rivers such as Indus, Ganges, Yamuna andBramhaputra. It remained confined to the Northern half of the Indian subcontinent. It wasalso found in plain, marshy, riverine terrains at a higher elevation such as Chitwan in Nepal
and Bhutan on the foothills of Eastern Himalaya i.e. Manas & Jaldapara. The largest
resident population occurs in the Kaziranga National Park.
In case of the GOH rhino, mating is the only activity that brings the male & female together
or else they are solitary in nature. There is no fixed season for mating. The average age ofsexual maturity of female rhino is 8-9 years and for male 9-10 years. Female rhino ispolyestrous, with an estrus cycle of 46-48 days, and remains for 2-3 days. When a femalerhino comes to estrus it urinates frequently and runs to and fro and shows an air ofrestlessness, intake of food becomes low. A male will detect the pheromone in urine of thefemale and will be aroused for mating. A pregnancy may be detected only at least 6 months
after conception, when there is a swelling of her underbelly. Before delivery her stomach
almost touches the ground. Gestation period of the rhino is 16-18 months. Single birth is arule and give birth to fully developed ones i.e. precocial. Delivery is anterior i.e. head andforelegs comes out first. The newborn calf is completely red in colour & after 3-4 weeks
changes into greyish colour. Average lying out period is one day. The average intercalving
period is three and half years [Comments by Richard Emslie: 3.5 years as an average is alittle long and in Africa would be indicative of a population probably above its maximum
productivity density. Under ideal conditions where densities are below Ecological Carrying
Capacity (ECC) both Black and White rhinos can have average intercalving intervals ofaround 2 to 2.5 years. No reason to think that GOH should have any different demography.
In Africa we would consider ICI's of <2.5 years as good to excellent. 2.5-3 as good tomoderate, 3-3.5 moderate to poor and >3.5 as poor to very poor. This may suggest that you
have nothing to lose by translocating more rhino to found or boost GOH populations in otherareas. Ultimately if you hardly remove any rhino then if dispersal is prevented densities arelikely to increase to the point the productivity suffers.] Average suckling period for rhinos is
18 months. At the age of 4 years, rhino calf attains relative physical maturity and afterwards
the growth is slow. The average life span of a rhino is 40 years. In captivity, it could go a bit
higher, or could be reduced much in the wild.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 107 of 402

The GOH Rhino is an indicator species of the wetland ecosystem, are of the richest & mostproductive ecosystems of the world. By studying the rhino we can learn a lot about thewetland ecosystem. Study of rhino requires a lot more conservation, protection & awarenessabout rhino.
6.1.1 World Population Of Rhinoceros
The table below shows that the world population of the rhinoceros species is struggling tosurvive today.
Species of Rhinoceros
World Population
African White Rhino
Northern (Ceratotherium simum cottoni)

4Southern (Ceratotherium simum simum)

20,420African Black Rhinoceros
Eastern (Diceros bicornis michaeli)

799South western (Diceros bicornis bicornis)

1,960South central (Diceros bicornis minor)

2,320Black Rhino total

5,080

Southern Asian Rhinoceros
Greater One Horned Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros
unicornis)
Javan Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros sondaicus)
Sumatran Rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis)

3,333
35-45
< 100

The rhinoceros have been hunted since time immemorial for their horn, skin and nails. The
distribution of species was fairly well all across the terai region in India in the past. Incessanthunting, for example, has reduced the territory of the rhinoceros in India to the Brahmaputra
valley grasslands.
6.2

Rhino Population of Kaziranga

The rhino population of Kaziranga have grown out of the handful, reportedly twenty pairs in1905 to an impressive number of 2329 (direct count, 2013). The population survived someof the highest poachings in 1980s and 1990s. The population growth of the species isgiven in the table below:

PIL 66/2012

Year

Count

1966

366

1972

658

1978

939

1984

946

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 108 of 402

1991

1120

1993

1164

1999

1552

2006

1855

2009

2048

2012

2290

2013

2329

[ Comments of Richard Emslie: Would be good to also show the Kaz numbers as a graphshowing the success story. Maybe there is a danger here in that someone may think“What is the problem?”. If so could add a comment like – While numbers continue toincrease, poaching has also increased in recent years. While current levels of poaching
are sustainable (there are still more births than deaths in the population) it will benecessary to redouble efforts to prevent poaching escalating further and reaching thetipping point where deaths start to exceed deaths and rhino numbers start to decline
again.]

Here, further on, the word “Gain” would be used to denote births of rhino and “Loss” would
indicate a rhino lost whether due to poaching or natural death. Net gain would mean total
gain minus total loss. Further, the population would be extrapolated for the non census
years by the formula:

Pi=Pc1 +( PC2−PC1 )
Xi
C2−C1

Where Pi is the population in any given year i between two census years C1 and C2(C2>C1). PC1 and PC2 are two census year populations.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 109 of 402

The losses from the population are available since 1982, as shown below:

Fighting

Drowning

Stuck in mud

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

21
21
24
18
17
25
29
28
28
36
36
27
17
28
31
27
22
15
24
12
41
42
55
43
26
49
65
29
45
46
62
48
28

14
13
9
13
14
10
21
13
12
23
16
18
14
13
11
9
11
14
9
13
6
13
26
19
18
19
23
15
20
18
8
13
4

0
0
2
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
1
4
46
1
0
7
0
4
0
1
1
1
43
4
0
0
1
0
12
1
0
1
1
0
2
0
28
1
0

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
2
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
1
1

8
5
8
1
2
0
2
4
5
7
7
4
3
4
2
3
7
7
3
2
8
4
1
4
7
1
8
8
1
0
1
5
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
4
0
1
0
0
5
5
2
0
0
1
3
0

1
1
3
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
2
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
1
0

1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

TOTAL

458

174

7

1

640

1065

472

9

162

19

135

22

24

4

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

TOTAL

Accidental

7

26
37
31
45
45
23
23
42
35
24
48
41
14
29
27
12
8
4
4
8
4
3
4
7
5
16
6
6
5
3
11
27
17

Others

Flood

6

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0

Unknown

Disease

5

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

MattingpredationTiger

4

19
31
14
23
18
6
7
11
4
4
2
2
3
7
1
6
4
2
2
6
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Old age

3

7
6
17
22
27
17
16
28
29
20
44
39
11
22
26
6
4
2
2
2
3
3
4
7
5
15
6
6
5
3
11
26
17

TOTAL

Other

2

Gunshot

1
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014

YEAR

Pit Poaching

NATURAL

Electrocution

POACHING

16

17

18

0
2
0
0
1
0
2
2
3
3
0
0
2
2
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

2
4
1
1
2
0
4
5
8
2
8
4
1
1
2
3
3
3
2
3
0
1
3
3
2
2
0
3
0
2
6
1
0

47
46
47
36
38
41
106
56
57
78
67
57
37
51
51
48
87
46
44
35
62
63
100
73
53
79
105
59
68
67
109
74
36

24

82

2023

Page No. 110 of 402

Cumulative losses since 1982 are computed in the Table below:Year

Poaching

Natural
Death

Total
LossesCumm
Poaching

Cumm
Natural
Death

Cumm Total
Removals

1982

26

47

73

26

47

73

1983

37

46

83

63

93

156

1984

31

47

78

94

140

234

1985

45

36

81

139

176

315

1986

45

38

83

184

214

398

1987

23

41

64

207

255

462

1988

23

106

129

230

361

591

1989

42

56

98

272

417

689

1990

35

57

92

307

474

781

1991

24

78

102

331

552

883

1992

48

67

115

379

619

998

1993

41

57

98

420

676

1096

1994

14

37

51

434

713

1147

1995

29

51

80

463

764

1227

1996

27

51

75

490

815

1305

1997

12

48

60

502

863

1365

1998

8

87

95

510

950

1460

1999

4

46

50

514

996

1510

2000

4

44

48

518

1040

1558

2001

8

35

43

526

1075

1601

2002

4

62

66

530

1137

1667

2003

3

63

66

533

1200

1733

2004

4

100

104

537

1300

1837

2005

7

73

80

544

1373

1917

2006

5

53

58

549

1426

1975

2007

16

79

95

565

1505

2070

2008

6

105

111

571

1610

2181

2009

6

59

65

577

1669

2246

2010

5

68

65

582

1737

2319

2011

3

67

70

585

1804

2389

2012

11

109

120

596

1913

2509

2013

27

74

101

623

1987

2610

2014

18

36

54

641

2023

2664

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 111 of 402

Now let us examine the losses vis a vis gains and the total extrapolated population since1982. The rate of net gain per can be easily obtained from the census years:

GNet =( PC2−PC1 )C2 −C1This value can further be extrapolated to have the net gain for every year between the noncensus years. Further, the losses can be easily added to the net gain to arrive at “actual
gains” for that year, assuming the population has been witnessing a positive growth all thiswhile [which is true for Kaziranga]. Thus, the following Table is obtained:Year

Population Net Gain

Total
Losses

Total
Gains

% Gain% Loss

1978

939

1982

942

1

73

74

7.86

7.75

1983

943

1

83

84

8.91

8.80

1984

946

1

78

79

8.35

8.25

1985

969

23

81

104

10.73

8.36

1986

992

23

83

106

8.77

8.37

1987

1015

23

64

87

8.57

6.31

1988

1038

24

129

153

14.74

12.43

1989

1062

24

98

122

11.49

9.23

1990

1096

24

92

116

10.58

8.39

1991

1120

24

102

126

11.25

9.11

1992

1144

22

115

137

11.98

10.05

1993

1164

22

98

120

10.31

8.42

1994

1228

64

51

115

9.36

4.15

1995

1292

64

80

144

11.15

6.19

1996

1356

64

75

139

10.25

5.53

1997

1422

66

60

126

8.86

4.22

1998

1486

66

95

161

10.83

6.39

1999

1552

64

50

114

7.35

3.22

2000

1595

43

48

91

5.71

3.01

2001

1638

43

43

86

5.25

2.63

2002

1681

43

66

109

6.48

3.93

2003

1724

43

66

109

6.32

3.83

2004

1767

43

104

147

8.32

5.89

2005

1810

45

80

125

6.91

4.42

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 112 of 402

2006

1855

43

58

101

5.44

3.13

2007

1919

64

95

159

8.29

4.95

2008

1983

65

111

176

8.88

5.60

2009

2048

64

65

129

6.30

3.17

2010

2129

81

65

146

6.86

3.05

2011

2210

80

70

150

6.79

3.17

2012

2290

80

120

200

8.73

5.24

2013

2329

39

101

140

6.01

4.34

2014

2368

39

54

93

3.93

2.28

As can be seen from the bar diagram below, the losses were just very close to getting
negative in the eighties and early part of nineties. However, as the population rose steadily,
all losses, including poaching, have been averaging around 8.27% from 19982 to 1995, and4.10% from 1996 to 2014. During 1996-2014, the average growth rate appears to be 7.23%.
Despite poaching the population is sustainable. It can be said that as of now, the populationin Kaziranga does not have a threat from poaching.
As regards the losses, other than natural death, there are three main other causes (all ofwhich are also included already in natural death category in the Tables above):
1. Tiger predation
2. Death in Floods
3. Accidents
Deaths due to tiger predation reported from 1982 to 2014 till now are 472/2023 (23.33%),
deaths due to floods and drowning are, during the same period, 184/2023 (9.1%). However,accidental deaths are few, 19/2023 (0.94%). Despite tiger population increasing, it does notseem to have any bearing on deaths due to tiger predation. However, tiger predation is anatural process, and cannot be avoided at all, and no management measures can be taken
against it.
Deaths due to floods, especially during high floods such as 1988, 1998, 2004 and 2012 arehigh. So far 184 rhinos have been lost. At 7% growth rate, over a decade, we have lost 120
productive rhinos, over and above 184 actually lost, taking the seeming toll to 304.
Therefore, there is a necessity to adopt management strategies such as creation of large
number of eco-friendly highlands that do not disturb the water movement during floods, forprotection of the rhinos.
Though accident cases are very minimum, below 1% of the total deaths, yet the rescue andrehabilitation of the rhinos should be modernized. There is a requirement of investment inbuilding capacities to rescue large mammals. Cases of death due to rhinos getting stuck in
mud can also be counted in accidents.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 113 of 402

The total deaths due to poaching from 1982 to 2014 till date are 640/2023 (31.64%). Though
not alarming, the numbers are on the higher side. This is mainly due to higher level ofpoaching during eighties and early nineties. At 7% growth rate, we have additionally lost
potential 450 rhinos over a decade. However, under no condition, the poaching levels canbe allowed to go up any further. All possible measures are required to be taken to stop
poaching.
Once the poaching comes under control, managing the additional, atleast 5% of the
population, which comes, at current levels of populations in 2013, to 116 should be so
managed that after accounting for all natural deaths, the balance of the population should betranslocated to some other safe destination – first within Assam & when saturated to safe
areas outside Assam, for which if need be, the Govt of Assam may form an agency like
NTCA having mandate to fund and monitor rhino populations under a “Project Rhino”All
India scheme with very strict and stringent guidelines. If need be, another chapter on“Project Rhino” may be added to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 on the lines of the
Project Tiger.
6.2.1 Rhino Census Productivity Levels in Kaziranga
The primary source of arriving at productivity levels in rhinos is the census data. Kaziranga
has traditionally been carrying out census operations using the “Direct Visual Count”
method. The salient features of the visual count method followed in Kaziranga are:1. Now census is done every three years, or in between as well, if required by the
management.
2. The season of conducting census is usually the month of March of the census year.
Next census, for example, is due in March, 2015.
3. A total of 81 compartments are there, of which 30 north of Difaloo and 34 south of
Difaloo have been maintained from very early times. There are 9 compartments
which fall in the Brahmaputra river islands, and another 8 that fall in revenue areas.
4. The areas of the compartments vary from 3.75 sq km to 16 sq km.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 114 of 402

5. Compartments are mostly based on natural boundary features. Artificial lines aremarked with flags
6. 100% direct visual count is done within the compartments.
7. Every rhino spotted is counted, and its age and sex are recorded.
8. For each compartment, there is a team of 3-4 persons consisting of one mahout,
one enumerator. One armed guard and one NGO/ media person.
9. Start time of the census is at 5.30 AM till 12.30 PM.
10. The south of Difaloo compartments are counted on day 1, followed by north of
Difaloo compartments and other areas on day 2. This is mainly to optimize
resources during census. This has been traditionally followed since beginning.
11. On the day 3, a random sample count of 15% of the compartments is done as acheck.
12. Day 1 and day 2 numbers are added and declared as “Total Count”.
13. Sample checks are for cross checking in case of any accidental/ gross errors only
The disadvantages of the system are:
1. Chances of double counting
2. Recording the sex wrongly (unless with baby, a rhino is difficult to be categorized as
male or female)
3. Lack of visibility (A rhino may not be visible if under thick canopy, or in tall grass orunder water)
4. There is no scope of error calculation
5. The numbers are absolute (Even if the rhinos could be more or less, the number
sticks)
6. Though counted, but determination of age or sex for rhinos submerged in waterholes and swamps is next to impossible (unless the rhino comes out after a longwait)
7. A large number of the rhinos get counted as unsexed. This makes actual male tofemale ratio determination a challenge.
Therefore, there is also a need to try out sample based counting, as well as try othermethods such as DNA profiling from dung samples. Count from census of 2006,2009,2012 and 2013 are shown in Table below and productivity discussed:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 115 of 402

Sub- adult

Year

Adult
Male

Adult
FemaleCalf<1 yr

Juvenile

2006
2009
2012
2013

481
597
658
645

640
710
819
810

105
100
172
135

304
307
350
276

<1 yr

Total Removals

Year

Calf

Male

Female

64
54
56
97

53
80
49
99

Un-sexed
Adult, Subadult

Total

208
200
186
267

1855
2048
2290
2329

Net Additions

2006

105

5+53=58

47

2009

100

6+59=65

35

2012

172

11+109=120

52

2013

135

27+74=101

34

Based on the cumulative losses, an attempt was made to see how long it takes
approximately (nearest cumulative figures only were taken) the populations to be lost totally:
Census Year

Population

No of Years for
Total Loss

1966

366

5

1972

658

9

1984

946

11

1993

1164

13

1999

1552

19

2006

1855

23

2009

2048

26

2012

2290

29

The table above indicates that, say, for example, there was a population of 1164 rhinos, andat the current rate of losses, and assuming that you had uniquely marked a rhino, and then,at the end of 13th year, if you came looking for that rhino, chances are that you would not findit because it would have been lost by then either by way of poaching or natural death. If one
were to mark one rhino today in Kaziranga, chances of finding that rhino in 2044 AD would
be almost nil.
Linear Regression analysis was performed on the above, the following results wereobtained:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 116 of 402

Sample size: 8
Mean x (x̄): 16.875
Mean y (̄): 1364.75
Intercept (a): 14.72588711598
Slope (b): 80.001428911646
Regression line equation: y=14.72588711598+80.001428911646x
The linear regression analysis shows that the average loss rate was 80 in Kaziranga from all
sources. Using the logic just described, and assuming that average life span of rhino is 40
years, what is that population figure which should be maintained so that a rhino marked
today has a chance of getting spotted again 40 years hence. Assuming this rate of loss,
which is 80, and also assuming that average life span of a rhino is 40 years, the population
figure comes to 3214. Therefore, if we were to maintain a population figure of 3214+,
chances are that some of the rhinos would be able to spend their average life span without
being lost due to natural death or poaching in Kaziranga. This figure incidentally is also very
close to the assumed Ecological Carrying Capacity (ECC) of Kaziranga.
Thereafter, linear regression analysis on the rhino census statistics was performed. Ityielded the following results:
Sample size: 11
Mean x (x̄): 27
Mean y (̄): 1387.9090909091
Intercept (a): 311.24661866631
Slope (b): 39.876387860844
Regression line equation: y=311.24661866631+39.876387860844x

The result shows that on an average net 39 rhinos are getting added annually, despite thelosses. The next question to be asked is at this rate when will Kaziranga reach the magicalfigure of 3214 rhino population? Given the current rate of losses and gains, Kaziranga
should be able to reach a population level of 3214 rhinos by 2047 AD.
Some studies [Richard Emslie (2005) and updated in 2014, Rajendra Garawd (2009)] showthat Kaziranga is starting to show density dependent reductions. An analysis of the last fourrhino direct count census reveals that the productivity of Kaziranga is on decline. This isevident from the “Calf per Capita Female” ratio computed from the available census data.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 117 of 402

Year

Observed Observed % Female in No of Un- No.
of Total
Adult Male Adult
the
sexed
Females
Estimates
FemaleObserved
adultsin
Un- Females
Population
sexed
Adults

2006

481

640

57.09

208

119

759

2009

597

710

54.32

200

109

819

2012

658

819

55.45

186

103

922

2013

645

810

55.67

267

149

959

Calf perCapitaFemaleYear

Total
FemalePopulation

2006

759

105

0.1383

2009

819

100

0.1222

2012

922

172

0.1084

2013

959

135

0.1043

Calf

<1 yr

Therefore, this is a strong signal that remedial measures need to be taken for, one one hand
habitat expansion of Kaziranga securing about 2500 - 3000 sq km (targetted to house a
population of 3214+ rhinos) of quality space for the animals to roam freely and dwell therein
without fears of poaching,. Of course, ecologically, 100% stocking is not desirable. Assuming
the populations need to be maintained at 80% of the ECC, the figure for Kaziranga comes to2571. Given the current population of 2329, Kaziranga is only short of 242 rhinos, which canbe easily achieved in next ten years. Side by side, the effort in the coming next 10 years
should be to secure the other habitats outside Kaziranga where annually about 25 rhinos
can be translocated from Kaziranga. However, efforts to increase the area of Kaziranga
should go on.
6.2.2

Modeling the Rhino Census Population in Kaziranga

Though certain linear relationship has been worked out above in respect of growth
behaviour of rhino population in Kaziranga, using equation such as
Y (or P) = 311.24661866631+39.876387860844 X…

(1)However, if the net gain is Gnet for some population P, the per capita gain is
Gnet
…
r=
P
So, if there is an initial population P0, the population next year would be
P1=P0+r.P0…
P1=(1+r).P0…
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

(2)
(3)
(4)

Page No. 118 of 402

The population next year would be P2:
P2=P1+r.P1
P2=(1+r).P1
P2=(1+r).(1+r).P0
P2=(1+r)2.P0
Therefore, the population in the nth year would be
Pn=(1+r)n.P0
Pn=Rn.P0
where R=1+r

…
…
…
…

(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)

…
…

(9)
(10)

However, it is seen that Equation 10 is a simplistic representation, and in reality, thepopulation cannot increase indefinitely, so that the value of r and R should be reducing overa period of time.
If the populations are known, the value of R can be easily found out by:
n Pn
R=
P0

√[ ]

…

(11)

The value of R was found for the census years of Kaziranga from 1966 to 2013 as below:

Year

n

Population

1966

0

366

R

1972

6

658

1.102700237

1978

12

939

1.081679774

1984

18

946

1.054172468

1991

25

1120

1.045753863

1993

27

1164

1.043782642

1999

33

1552

1.044750153

2006

40

1855

1.041409585

2009

43

2048

1.040858838

2012

46

2290

1.040667645

2013

47

2329

1.040159053

PIL 66/2012

Remarks
Initial Population

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your FutureOver Count!

Page No. 119 of 402

The R vs n Plot is shown below:

It shows that the relationship of R and n is exponential in nature, which is but natural. When
R approaches very close to 1 or (becomes even slightly less than 1), the population would
start declining.
An exponential best fit of the (n,R) pairs was obtained with the following values:−0.001184294083. n

Rn=1.091219873 e

…

(12)

Though the residual sum of squares (RSS) was 1.111717616·10-3, the predicted values of
R were far from satisfactory. Using the exponent part of the Equation 12,
En=e -0.001184294083.n

…

(13)

…

(14)

values of R/ were obtained as below:
Rιn=

Rn
En

The following table was obtained:
n

R

R/

6

1.102700237

1.1105636703

12

1.081679774

1.0971618485

18

1.054172468

1.0768858052

25

1.045753863

1.0771787744

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 120 of 402

27

1.043782642

1.0776979198

33

1.044750153

1.0863891313

40

1.041409585

1.0919301711

43

1.040858838

1.0952370497

461.040667645

1.0952370497

47

1.040159053

1.0996978485

The plot of R' vs n is shown below:

The plot clearly shows that the first three points fall on a decreasing line, and remaining
points fall on an increasing line. The two sets of lines were approximated using linear fit, andthe following results were obtained:
For the first three points:
R/n = -2.806488758x10-3.n + 1.128548306…
The correlation coefficient being -0.993128, and RSS being 7.875820205x10-6.

(15)

For the rest of the points:
R/n= 1.04392076x10-3.n + 1.050657271…
The correlation coefficient being 0.996679, and RSS being 3.531087677x10-6.

(16)These two lines together were found to approximate the R' vs n curve very well. However,when each of these lines was used to approximate R values separately, it was found that
Equation 15 dropped of the population rapidly after n=25, and the Equation 16 showed poor
approximation for early years, but did well for rest of it, but tended to overpopulate towards
the end. The predicted populations can be seen in the Table below:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 121 of 402

Year

n

Population
by Eq 15

Population by
Eq 16

Error in Eq 16

4

5

6

7

Population Population
by
Eq 15 & 16

1

2

3

1966

0

366

1972

6

658

662

662

489

-169

1978

12

939

916

916

644

-295

1984

18

946

964

964

835

-111

1991

25

1120

1109

721

1109

-11

1993

27

1164

1198

619

1198

34

1999

33

1552

1493

323

1493

-59

2006

40

1855

1888

105

1888

33

2009

43

2048

2073

57

2073

25

2012

46

2290

2266

29

2266

-24

2013

47

2329

2331

23

2331

2

Therefore, it is seen that the equation 16 approximates very well the census from 1991 till
2013, with the highest error being in 1999 census. However, the equation starts showing
very high populations above and below. Therefore, the error of equation 16 was simulatedusing a 10 degree polynomial fit with the following coefficients:
Power

CoefficientPower

CoefficientPower

Coefficient10-3.198061364x10-10 9

8.811297914x10-876.962380539x10-46-2.864416037x10-2 50.7499609701

4-12.39932597

3

123.2118263

2-647.9196014

11216.532593

0586.1505127

RSS

14832.77645

8-1.044340459x10-5

The error is given by:
10

Δ En =∑ Ci . ni

…

(17)

…

(18)

i=0

The simulated population is given by:
Pn=[ Rιn . En ] . P0 −Δ EnnThough the Equation 18 very well approximates the census in Kaziranga from 1966 to 2013,
the error function goes out of proportions beyond 2018. Without the error function, theequation 16 shows that an initial population of 366 would reach a peak in 100 years (for us

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 122 of 402

in 2066AD) with a population of 4789, and then the population would start declining. Anothererror function needs to be designed for Equation 16.
The simulated population values from 1966 to 2013 are shown below:
Year

n

Error
Function

Corrected
Population

Error

4

5

6

7

Observed Population
Population
by
Eq 16

1

2

3

1966

0

366

1972

6

658

489

-222

711

53

1978

12

939

644

-343

987

48

1984

18

946

835

-151

986

40

1991

25

1120

1109

-30

1139

19

1993

27

1164

1198

-8

1206

42

1999

33

1552

1493

-75

1568

16

2006

40

1855

1888

6

1882

27

2009

43

2048

2073

30

2043

-5

2012

46

2290

2266

-9

2275

-15

2013

47

2329

2331

-4

2335

6

According to equation 15, an R value below 1.0275 leads to decline in population; andaccording to Equation 16, the R value below 1.026 is not sustainable in the long run. Taking
the upper value of 1.0275, it can be theorized that if the net gain is below 2.75% of the total
population P0, then the population is likely to decline. This magical number comes to 2.75%
of 366=10.07. Therefore, net gain cannot get below 10. This makes the journey of the rhinoin Kaziranga from 2013 to 2014-18 a little scary, given the extreme poaching pressures. If
poaching, deaths due to flood and accidents are almost eliminated, rhino population would
be safe, till the ecological parameters of Kaziranga so permit.
The other way of modeling the population based on factors of the habitat, productivity,
competition, predation etc. is beyond the scope of this Report. It would require some
additional ground based inputs. Currently research on grassland productivity is going on.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 123 of 402

6.3

Conclusion

The following key conclusions are drawn based on the discussion above:
1. The rhino population of Kaziranga has started to exhibit density dependent
reductions.
2. A net gain of 10 or below would lead the population to decline. Currently it is 39, but
may get hit by excessive poaching, if not controlled.
3. If poaching is brought to halt, some population, say about 25 in numbers, must betranslocated elsewhere in safe rhino habitats to keep the population of Kaziranga
productive.
4. If need be in future, populations may have to be moved outside Assam, if theAssam habitats reach saturation.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 124 of 402

CHAPTER 777.1

RHINO POACHING
The Rhinoceros Horn

It is the horn of the rhinoceros that has become the cause of likely extinction of the animal
species from the face of the earth. It is also used as talisman in many cultures. The horn
has been traditionally held to have magical curative powers and an aphrodisiac [Richard
Emslie: Not right to say magical curative powers and an aphrodisiac. The latter was a verysmall part of the market but this collapsed in the past when horn prices rose. For decades
rhino horn use as an aphrodisiac (despite press reports) has not been one of its mainuses. This perpetuation of the aphrodisiac myth is coming home to bite us because now
there are some reports it is being used for this in Vietnam although not sure if it is just an
isolated incident. Rhino horn has been a respected ingredient in Traditional Chinese
medicine for over 2000 years.]. It is not entirely correct to say that modern research has
shown that the rhino horn has no such properties, as it has been shown to have certain
fever reducing property. Studies using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and X-ray
Spectroscopy reveals that the rhino horn consists of two separate phases- one of hair likefilaments, built around a central core in circumferential layers and the other surrounding
and filling the spaces between the filaments as a matrix. Together these structures makeup as a biological composite, structurally similar to metal, ceramic or polymer based
composites. Using X-ray Computed Tomography (CT Scan) of the white rhinoceros horn
revealed that the horns, though entirely keratinous in nature, also contain melanin andcalcium salts in the core.
CITES commissioned a study No. S-389 with TRAFFIC in March, 2012 to compile acomprehensive review on the rhino horn and its curative powers etc. Though modern
research has shown that the horns do not have any curative powers [Comment of Richard
Emslie: The TRAFFIC document notes that there has been one proper double blind
clinical trial that was undertaken in Taiwan. IN this study rhino horn was found to havestatistically significant fever reducing properties and was superior to buffalo horn which
also reduced fever. While the placebo control had no fever reducing effects, a cheaper
western medicine was the best fever reducer as it reduced temperature by more thanrhino horn, and did so for a longer period. Thus rhino horn did appear to have fever
reducing powers in this case; albeit not as good as the cheaper western medicine. I recall
that in one other study, dosages of horn that were higher than would ever be given did
appear to have some fever reducing effect. However I think another study didn't show any
effect. However this issue is not just one of efficacy or not of specific treatments but
perceptions of the people taking the supposed treatment. In the same way some people
still buy homeopathic remedies in the west when they may have been diluted so much thatthey may not contain even a molecule of active ingredient], the horn continues to find more
and more curative uses among its traditional clientèle, including cure for cancer and now
almost anything where every other medicine fails. The CITES report, thus, throws someinsight as to why the trade in rhinoceros horn continues by way of faith healing andtraditional medicine, despite the same being banned in China, Japan, South Korea andViet Nam.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 125 of 402

This has led to escalation of prices in the international market. Today, the rhino horn iscostlier than gold and platinum. A rhino horn could cost as much as US $ 300,000.00 per
Kg. Rhino horn in some cultures of the World, especially in counties such as Viet Nam, as
virility enhancer and “Party Drug”, or even status symbol, as its now costlier than cocaine.
Thus, the killing of the rhinoceros continues. [Comment of Richard Emslie: Poaching
fuelled by the demand - this currently has to be supplied by killing rhinos as there currently
is no legal international trade and there is a limit to the number of existing horns that can bestolen from museums etc. Demand reduction efforts are likely to be a key part of any
solution. Interestingly the new trade dynamic in Viet Nam appears to favour horns fromAfrican rhino as these are larger and currently high prices are being paid/kg. HistoricallyAsian horns fetched much higher prices but today it may be more profitable for criminals topoach African rhinos given the greater amount of horn they get per rhino. One could
hypotheise that possibly this may be giving some protection to Asian rhinos currently as
the relative poaching rates of Asian rhinos appear lower than in African countries being
affected by the big upsurge in rhino poaching. However the other argument is that given
the high prices being paid/kg it still will be worthwhile for a poacher to kill a calf rhino in
Africa or an Asian rhino.]
7.2

International Scenario On Rhino Poaching

In 2012, a record 668 rhinos were poached in South Africa, up by almost 50 per cent from2011 figures. In 2013, the toll continued to rise, with 201 rhinos killed in Kruger National
Park alone. A subspecies of the black rhino was declared extinct in the wild in West Africa
in 2011, and that year Vietnam lost its last Javan rhino, which was killed by poachers. In
April 2013, wildlife authorities in Mozambique’s Limpopo National Park reported that thecountry’s last 15 rhinos had been wiped out by poachers working with the game rangers
responsible for protecting them. In India, rhino horn is seen to be bartered for arms by
militant groups working with poaching syndicates. Below is the table which depict the year
and no of rhino poaching occurred in South Africa.

PIL 66/2012

Year

No of Rhino Poached in South Africa

2000

6

2001

7

2002

25

2003

22

2004

10

2005

13

2006

10

2007

13

2008

83

2009

122

2010

333

2011

448

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 126 of 402

2012

668

2013

1004

2014 (as of 10th July)
558* Data published by South African Department of Environmental Affairs (2014)
Looking at the data, if we see in 2012, a staggering 668 Rhinos were killed, thats almost 2
rhinos a day. The scenario was worst in 2013 where 1004 rhinos was killed which amounts
to almost 3 rhinos a day killed. Worrying trend is also seen in 2014 where 419 Rhinos havealready been killed by may, 2014 at a rate of about 2.8 rhinos per day. The current rate isabout 2.9 per day. With this rate the we could see rhino death overtaking the birth in 201618. The poaching is by no means is confined to South Africa, but it is surging all around the
Rhino bearing countries made possible by easy to establish illegal trading routes spanning
across many countries. [ Richard Emslie: Poaching has been escalating alarmingly in Kenya
where in relative terms poaching is higher than in S. Africa. Also appears poaching to be
increasing in Namibia (second most important rhino range state), which is worrying]
7.3

Rhino Poaching In Kaziranga

The international trade in rhino horns in the leading factor driving the world's five species ofrhino on the verge of extinction. The recent pressure of poaching of all species of rhinos inrhino bearing areas of the world invited severe concerns of the world conservation
community. African rhino are heavily targeted and Indian rhino are also subjected to thisthreat of international demand based poaching in all rhino bearing ares in India and Nepal.
The pressure on the Kaziranga National Park is tremendous as the rhinoceros population isvery high and the entire boundary is very porous. The northern side is surrounded by theriver Brahmaputra and its numerous islands/ chapories. There is a very large population of
traditional fishing communities all along the river, some of whom may be potential field men
to the gang of poachers. The southern side of the Park is also full of human habitation,
making patrolling very difficult. Poaching in the Park is on the rise. The statistics below
shows that just like South Africa, Kaziranga is experiencing a period of very heavy poaching.
Large scale continued poaching would make the resident rhinoceros population unviableand prone to extinction, if the trend continues to steepen or is not arrested in the long run.
YEAR

NO. OF
POACHINGYEARNO. OF
POACHINGYEARNO. OF
POACHINGYEARNO. OF
POACHING

1965

18

1979

02

1993

41

2007

16

1966

05

1980

11

1994

14

2008

06

1967

12

1981

24

1995

29

2009

06

1968

10

1982

26

1996

27

2010

05

1969

08

1983

37

1997

12

2011

03

1970

02

1984

31

1998

08

2012

11

1971

08

1985

45

1999

04

2013

27

1972

-

1986

45

2000

04

2014*

18

1973

03

1987

23

2001

08

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 127 of 402

1974

03

1988

23

2002

04

1975

05

1989

42

2003

03

1976

01

1990

35

2004

04

1977

-

1991

24

2005

07

1978
03
1992
* Till June, 8th , 2014

48

2006

05

Taking advantage of the annual projected populations as already worked out in
Chapter 6, we can reproduce the table above in terms of % of the populationpoached annually as shown below:

Year

Population

Poached Rhinos% of Poaching

18

5.66

1965

318

1966

366

5

1.37

1967

412

12

2.91

1968

468

10

2.14

1969

516

8

1.55

1970

562

2

0.36

1971

610

8

1.31

1972

658

0

0

1973

704

3

0.43

1974

750

3

0.4

1975

796

5

0.63

1976

843

1

0.12

1977

891

0

0

1978

939

3

0.32

1979

940

2

0.21

1980

941

11

1.17

1981

941

24

2.55

1982

942

26

2.76

1983

943

37

3.92

1984

946

31

3.28

1985

969

45

4.64

1986

992

45

4.54

1987

1015

23

2.27

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 128 of 402

1988

1038

23

2.22

1989

1062

42

3.95

1990

1096

35

3.19

1991

1120

24

2.14

1992

1144

48

4.2

1993

1164

41

3.52

1994

1228

14

1.14

1995

1292

29

2.24

1996

1356

27

1.99

1997

1422

12

0.84

1998

1486

8

0.54

1999

1552

4

0.26

2000

1595

4

0.25

2001

1638

8

0.49

2002

1681

4

0.24

2003

1724

3

0.17

2004

1767

4

0.23

2005

1810

7

0.39

2006

1855

5

0.27

2007

1919

16

0.83

2008

1983

6

0.3

2009

2048

6

0.29

2010

2129

5

0.23

2011

2210

3

0.14

2012

2290

11

0.48

2013

2329

27

1.16

2014
2368
Till 4th August, 2014

21

0.89

The table above clearly shows that though highest poaching numbers wereachieved in 1992, but the highest poaching rate occurred in 1965 only. [Richard
Emslie: one issue to discuss is how conident you are in inding all poachedrhino?If you on;t then the rhino poaching will underestimate actual relative
poaching. However, in your case the manpower density is so high you should
presumably ind most carcasses]

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 129 of 402

7.3.1 Analysis of the Poaching Statistics
The highest reported poaching has taken place in 1984 when the rhinoceros
population was just about 1100 in numbers. The period from 1980 to 1997
seem to be heavy poaching era with total deaths due to poaching being 530,
giving an average of 29 rhinos per year. During the same period, the rhino
population grew from 940 to 1300, at a rate of 2.12%. Before and after thisperiod, the poaching igures are very low, which could be either due toexcellent protection, low intrusion or unreported/ undetected incidents ofpoaching.
Let us look at the current trends of poaching in 2013 and 2014.
Year Jan

Feb MarApr

May JunJul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov Dec

2013 2

4

4

1

4

1

2

2

3

2014 3

5

3

2

5

0

3

This can be further broken down range-wise year-wise:Year Range Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
2013 HQ

1

0

0

0

0

2014 HQ

0

0

0

0

0

2013 BP

1

1

1

0

0

2014 BP

1

2

0

1

0

2013 CR

0

0

0

0

0

2014 CR

0

1

3

0

0

2013 ER

0

1

1

1

2

2014 ER

0

1

0

1

3

2013 NR

0

1

1

0

0

2014 NR

2

1

0

0

0

2013 WR

0

1

1

0

2

2014 WR

0

0

0

0

2

1

Oct

Nov

Dec

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

2

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

1

0

Range wise figures show that till May, 2014 HQ Beat at Bokakhat has gone poaching free
this year. Till May, there was 1 poaching last year, but none so far this year. In Burapahar
Range (BP), the total count this year is just one up from the last year till May. The Central
Range (CR) also known as Kaziranga Range has been the real cause of concern as it
contributed 4 cases of poaching this year till now against nil poaching in the range forseveral years. Poaching in Eastern Range (ER) has remained constant with respect to lastyear, totaling to 5 till now (May). The Northern Range (NR) has seen increase in count by
1 from January to May this compared to last year. The Western Range (WR) till now
seems to have the best performance among the five ranges, as it had so far only two
instances of poaching compared to 4 last year for the period January to May.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 130 of 402

If one looks at the spatial distribution patterns of poaching, it is clear that attacks from thenorth of the Brahmaputra river are on the rise, as can be seen from the table below:

Sl
No.

Geography

Poaching Incidents (No)

Bank

2013

2014
(till 23rd May)

6/27

8/17

1

Attack from the North(affecting all the ranges)

2

Attack from South Side, Karbi
Anglong and Bagser RF side
(affecting BR, WR)

9+5=14/27

4+1=5/17

3

Attack from South Side, Karbi
Anglong Side (Affecting Panbari
RF/ KA areas)

0

0

4

Attack from South Side, DhanbariJaporipathar area (affecting ER
and part of CR)

6/27

3/17

5

Attack from South Side, Sildubi topanbari (affecting CR)

0

1/17

6

Stray Rhino Killings (Majuli,
Golaghat, Gohpur etc.) outside
Park areas

1/27

0

TOTAL

27/27

17/17

Remarks

BP+WR

Near Majuli

It is clear from the table above that about 50% of the poaching has taken place from thenorth bank side in 2014 (till May), compared to just 22.2% contribution for the whole of thelast year. Last year more than 50% of the poaching was contributed from Karbi Anglong
and Bagser side, whereas this year its contribution so far has been only to about 30%.
Year

Pit Poaching Electrocution

Gun Shot

Other
Methods

Total

1983

31

0

6

0

37

1984

14

0

17

0

31

1985

23

0

22

0

45

1986

18

0

27

0

45

1987

6

0

17

0

23

1988

7

0

16

0

23

1989

11

3

28

0

42

1990

4

2

29

0

35

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 131 of 402

1991

4

0

20

0

24

1992

2

2

44

0

48

1993

2

0

39

0

41

1994

3

0

11

0

14

1995

7

0

22

0

29

1996

1

0

26

0

27

1997

6

0

6

0

12

1998

4

0

4

0

8

1999

2

0

2

0

4

2000

2

0

2

0

4

2001

6

0

6

0

8

2002

1

0

3

0

4

2003

0

0

3

0

3

2004

0

0

4

0

4

2005

0

0

7

0

7

2006

0

0

5

0

5

2007

1

0

15

0

16

2008

0

0

6

0

6

2009

0

0

6

0

6

2010

0

0

5

0

5

2011

0

0

3

0

3

2012

0

0

11

0

11

2013

0

0

26

1

27

2014

0

0

18

0

18

Pit poaching appears to be the most prevalent mode of rhino poaching upto 1995. Gunshot, though has been there since beginning, but is can be say that by the end of 2002, pit
poaching was almost deserted as a method of poaching. Since 2002, gun shots havedominated the poaching method. It has been observed that for past four to five years, thepoachers have started to use sophisticated fire arms such as silencer guns and AK series
rifles. Of late, involvement of extremist organizations has also come to light. It is strongly
suspected that members of banned outfits such as KPLT and NDFB are involved in Rhino
poaching.
Time of Incident Analysis:
In order to see if there was any preferred time of poaching, the data of 2013 and 2014 was
subjected to a time analysis. For convenience of classification 10 time zones in a day weredevised as given below:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 132 of 402

Sl.
No.

Time From – TimeTo

Common Name

Time
Code

Hours

1

23.00 to 01.00 HRS Mid Night

T1

2

2

01.00 to 03.00 HRS Wee Hours

T2

2

3

03.00 to 05.00 HRS Dawn

T3

2

4

05.00 to 08.00 HRS Morning

T4

3

5

08.00 to 11.00 HRS Mid Morning

T5

3

6

11.00 to 13.00 HRS Noon

T6

2

7

13.00 to 16.00 HRS After Noon

T7

3

8

16.00 to 18.00 HRS Dusk

T8

2

9

18.00 to 21.00 HRS Evening

T9

3

10

21.00 to 23.00 HRS Night

T10

2

The classification above is more of a convenience, best suited to jungle scenario. Of the
27 events of 2013, time of the incident was available only for 15 incidents; and for 2014, of
the 18 incidents so far time was available for 13 incidents of poaching. Each of these
events were classified as to have happened during one of the T1 to T10 time periods ofthe day. Accordingly, the following table was obtained:
TOTAL
Expected
No of
Time
No of
Period Incidents in Incidents in Observed
2014
2013
T1

2

0

2

2.334

T2

5

1

6

2.334

T3

1

1

2

2.334

T4

3

5

8

3.501

T5

0

0

0

3.501

T6

1

0

1

2.334

T7

0

2

2

3.501

T8

1

3

4

2.334

T9

2

1

3

3.501

T10

0

0

0

2.334

TOTAL
15
13
28
28.01
The expected value in the table above has been arrived at by dividing the total incidents
by 24 hours and then adjusting for their exact summation to 28. Chi square test was using
http://graphpad.com. The null hypothesis was that poachers have no preference for time ofthe day for poaching. Chi square test was performed. The following results were obtained:
Chi squred =20.142p=0.0171
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 133 of 402

This implies that the null hypothesis is not correct, and poachers do seem to havestatistically significant preference for time, which is the periods of the night time, dusk to
dawn. However this could depend a lot on patrolling and vigil, as can be seen from theanalysis of data of 2013 and 2014 as discussed below:It is clear from the table above that during 2013, 50% of the poaching incidents happened
during T1 to T3 period. When night patrolling was strengthened, poaching during this time
has shown a drastic reduction in 2014, but poaching increased during staff withdrawal
hours i.e. morning time, and evening time as well. Given the current strength of staff anddeployment mode, it not possible to give overlapping time periods for change of guard.
The poachers seems to have availed the off guard hours. However, it should not be taken
as the only way to reduce poaching (i.e. by rotating staff with sufficient overlaps in duty
hours).
Moon Phase Analysis:
Having seen that poachers do prefer night time to day time. Now let us examine if moonphases have any impact on poaching. Moon Phase analysis of the incidents was done forthe period 2013 and 2014. In order to classify the moon phase correctly, a complete cycleof moon phase was selected as shown below:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 134 of 402

Depending upon visibility during night and shape of the moon, the moon phases weredivided into four classes of unequal period. The phases of the moon were classified into
four categories for convenience as shown below:
Description

No. of Days

Sl
No.

Days of the Month (as in
Figure)

Moon
Phase
Code

1

12 to 20

Full Moon Period

M1

9

2

21 to 26

Waning Moon Phase

M2

6

3

27 to 04

New Moon Phase

M3

9

4

05 to 11

Waxing Moon Phase

M4

7

For a given date of occurrence of the incident, the actual phases of the moon for thatmonth were seen from http://stardate.org/nightsky/moon (from where the above moonphase diagram has been taken for this analysis), and then counted back or forth from asuitable start point of the above reference chart to get the day classified into any of the 4categories. Since each category has roughly 6 to 10 days, date of reporting was taken as
the date for look up. Accordingly all the incidents of 2013 and 2014 were classified into thefour categories, and the results are summarized in the Table below:
Sl
No.

Moon Phase
Period

No.

%

No.

%

Total
Observed

Expected
Values

1

M1

14

52

7

39

21

13.06452

2

M2

4

15

4

22

8

8.70967

3

M3

8

30

4

22

12

13.06452

4

2013

2014

M4

1

3

3

17

4

10.16129

TOTAL

27

100

18

100

45

45

Chi square test was performed on the above data. The null hypothesis is that poachers
have no preference for any phases of the moon and poaching could happen during any
phase of the moon. It was, however, found that
Chi squarep

PIL 66/2012=8.701=0.0335

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 135 of 402

This means that the null hypothesis is not valid, and poachers do seem to have preference
for certain phases of the moon, namely the full moon period.
It may be noted here that M1 represents the full moon period when the Park is supposed
to be most susceptible to poaching. M3 is the new moon period when there is pitch
darkness, and poaching incidents are less likely to happen. M2 is the period of waning
after the full moon, and poaching incidents may continue post full moon period as well. M4
is the period after new moon when the moon is waxing, but since it succeeds the dark
moon, poaching incidents are less likely to happen.
The table for 2013 mostly fits the above assumption, except the fact that 30% of thepoaching happened during dark period. This implies that poachers are willing to takeadvantage of darkness and attempt poaching, despite the fact that visibility is at its
minimum in the Park. The break up for 2014 typically does not meet up the description
given above for 2013, as full moon poaching has reduced due to extra vigil during thisperiod. However, the pressure has shifted to the darkness period and its succeeding days.
In all, there is no distinct pattern in the poaching in 2014 wrt moon phases. From the field
information, it can be said that due to stepped up vigil, attempts have become now almost
random in nature.
Conclusion:
The poachers constantly change their strategy. Therefore, no single solution from the
management side will work magic. The problem needs to be understood in entirety andstrategies to be evolved accordingly. A single type solution is most likely to fail sooner.
7.3.2 Anti-Poaching Statistics
The statistics below clearly indicates that there has been serious attempts on part of thePark authorities to contain poaching within the available means of rigorous patrolling andextensive field duties. However, poaching has seen a rising trend mainly due to rising
prices of the rhino horn in the international market. If one goes by pure statistics and area,
the poaching pressure is higher in Kaziranga National Park than Kruger National Park.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 136 of 402

However, Kaziranga lacks the sophistication and infrastructure of Kruger. Despite all odds
such as lack of infrastructure, equipment, shortage of staff, a very porous border all along,every attempt has been made to contain poaching:
Particulars

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

No. ofpoachersarrested
No. ofpoachers
killed byforest staff

5

16

2

11

38

24

22

17

23

14

11

7

16

0

0

0

0

0

3

1

5

2

0

6

3

1

No. ofarms
seized by
the forest
staff

0

1

0

2

4

0

3

3

1

0

3

7

3

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 137 of 402

Year

No. of poacherarrested

No. of poacher
killedRecoveries
Remarks
Arms

Ammuniion

Others44 RdsCash recovery Rs
20,000/-

2006

22

nil

0.303 = 1
SBBL = 1
Handmade
Gun = 1

2007

17

5

0.303 = 3

25 RdsCash recovery Rs
12,500/-

2008

23

2

Gun = 1

nil

nil

2009

14

nil

nil

nil

2010

11

6

0.303 = 3

34 RdsDry Rhino skin =
15 kg

2011

7

3

0.303 = 7
Silencer = 3

92 Rds

2012

16

1

0.303 = 3

37 RdsPoacher killed in Western
Range

Poacher killed in Kaziranga
Range = 4 Eastern Range = 2
Poacher killed in Kaziranga
Range = 3
Poacher killed in Northern
Range = 1

2013

71

5

0.303 = 7
Stand Gun = 1
Silencer = 2

70 Rds

Vehicle = 3
M Cycle = 3
Cash recovery =13,19,500/Decomposed
Tiger Skin = 1

2014 (Till
June, 8th)17

70.303 = 5
Rile Bore notascertain = 1
Silencer = 2

58 RdsCashrecovery=4,78,000/-, Horn recovered =2

Poacher killed in Eastern
Range = 2 Western Range = 2
Burapahar Range = 1
Poacher killed in Western
Range = 3
Northern Range = 1 Eastern
Range = 1
Burapahar Range=2

Already in 2014 in less than half the year, 17 arrests have been made by the forest staff
and 5 poachers have been killed. Though this is a very good record in itself and testimonythat the field staff are discharging their duties. However, poaching numbers have also
risen.
Use of Dog Squad:
K9 Dog squad was used for the first time in Kaziranga National Park in 2013. Looking at
the advantage that the dog squad offers, he Park authorities have started using dog squad
is being used now frequently since January, 2014. Currently “Zorba” a trained memebr of
the K-9 Dog Squad Unit trained as a tracker dog has been stationed at Kaziranga forinvestigating wildlife crimes in the Park. A brief of the investigation using the dog squad in2014 is presented below:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 138 of 402

Sl.
No.

Date and Start Camp1.

25th January, 2014,
Sundari Camp,
Burapahar Range

Tracked the poacher based onpiece of cloth found at crime
scene

2

30th April, 2014,
Kukrakata RF, Jurital
Burapahar Range

Tracked based on foot print, led to Meanwhile poachers
spot where the team relaxed aspotted by staff, andwhile ago
opened fire on staff
by AK 473

5th May, 2014,
Barnalini campWestern Range

Tracked based on foot print at the Search abandoned
scene-of-crime, on way found sole due to darkness, butof the shoe on further track found encounter event tookraincoat cap...
place at night4

6th May, 2014, spot of
encounter

Tracked till Brahmaputra river5

7th May, 2014, spot of
injury and blood

Tracked for 1.5 km, spottedpoacher, staff alerted

Poacher cordoned,
due to bad weather
subsequently killed inencounter on the 9th
May, 2014

6

23rd May, 2014, sceneof counter,
Eastern Range

Tracked based on bags and axe,
found foot track near river,crossed over to village

Entered house,suspect absconding

7.3.3

Event Description

OutcomeEnded in Amguri
Village, and suspect
Ratna Gowala wasarrested

Possible Reasons for Increase in Poaching in Kaziranga

Though there is an immediate and direct reasoning that poaching is on the riseinternationally and Kaziranga is no exception. However, local conditions differ in Kaziranga
and Kruger National Parks, and so do the levels of sophistication and the issues
surrounding the Parks. In order to get an objective understanding of the underlying issues,
it would be advisable to segregate issues that have always existed, and the phenomenathat are relatively new in respect of Kaziranga.
In the first category of existing issues, the following are notable:• Porous border all around• Lack of sophistication• Lack of conviction of poachers• Growing population around the fringes of the Park.
• Low income opportunities• Easy access to international markets through neighbouring States

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 139 of 402

On the other hand, the new issues emerging are:
• Rising prices of rhino horn in the international market (such as Vietnam)• Easy availability of illegal arms around Kaziranga• Involvement of terrorist outfits in poaching• Use of sophisticated arms such as AK Series rifles and Silencers• Counter-fire on Forest Staff• Emergence of new poaching gangs/ recruits• Poor relations between fringe population and forest staff• Poor intelligence network• Lack of motivation among the staff
Today all the issues including the ones that were always existing or have emerged of latemust be fully addressed to make Kaziranga a poaching free National Park.
7.3.4

International Perspective on Poaching

All the interactions with most of experts at international level points to the exceptionallysharp increase in poaching in South Africa driven by high market demands and high rates
being offered for rhino horns. Rod Potter admits that there has been exceptionally highpoaching pressures not seen in the past. The poachers also seem to constantly changing
their strategies. There was a period in Kruger when poachers entered in groups of 3 to 4
(the typical formation being the shooter with his weapon, armed body guards and hacker).
This pattern gave way to back-pack poacher with a gun, GPS and Mobile phone who could
enter surreptitiously and leave by fall of night without getting detected in the night vision
devices. Night time intrusions have been now been taken over by day time intrusions to
avoid detection by thermal scanners and night vision devices.
In Chitwan, the anti poaching strategies started with building a base of informers who were
paid monthly remunerations. Additionally, they were paid incentives whenever poachers
were actually captured. These informers mostly come from the population residing on thefringe of the Park.
7.3.5

Anti Poaching Measures Taken So Far

The Government of Assam has not only taken effective steps to protect rhino in all rhino
bearing ares but has also made sincere efforts to scientifically plan and manage its protectedareas to ensure long term survival of rhino, assemblages and habitats. With the spurt ofrecent poaching incidents, following major initiatives have been taken y the Government:• Government of Assam has taken many measures for effective management ofWildlife in the state including legislative changes,bringing Wildlife (Protection) ( Assam
Amendment) Act, 2009 for strict enforcement in handling wildlife crime including
poaching of Rhinos. The penalty for the offence committed relating to any animal in
Schedule I or Part II of Schedule II of Wildlife (Protection) Act for second andsubsequent offence has been raised to minimum seven years bur may extend to life
imprisonment and fine not less than seventy five thousand rupees.
• The Government of Assam has constituted a Kaziranga Biodiversity andDevelopment Committee chaired by Minister Environment and Forest, Govt. of
Assam including members from other line departments, district civil and police
administration and technical experts to examine the infrastructural development in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 140 of 402

•
•
•

•
•

holistic manner for better conservation in the fringe area of the KNP.
Additional support for control of poaching in KNP has been provided by placing 535
Assam Forest Protection Force personnel with 200 SLRs and 125 home guards.
Process is on to acquire more sophisticated arms like AK Series weapons.
The Government has engaged services of the elite investigation agency of thecountry, the CBI, to establish forward and backward linkage of the wildlife crime.
An Electronic surveillance system, called the Electronic Eye in under implementationin Kaziranga. Under the scheme, 8 nos of tall towers of 45 meter height are being
erected, and those would be fitted with visual and thermal imaging cameras with
24X7 access.
Aerial surveillance using Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) has been tested in
Kaziranga. However, the Govt of India, Ministry of Defence has so far not given
clearance on flying of UAVs in the Park.
A “Special Task Force” under Addl D.G. of Police has already been constitution by
the Govt. of Assam. The Force has become operational in the field.

It is no doubt that the Government is doing all it can to save this World Heritage Site fromany damages and has left no stone unturned for protection of the rhinoceros.
Since Kaziranga National Park is the home of the largest number of endangered Greater
Indian One Horned Rhinoceros, it is constantly under threat from the poachers. Owing tovigorous patrolling by the field staff as well as pro-active role played by the Park authorities,
the poaching is contained to certain extent. However, it is high time that the modernization of
the strike forces, forest guards and other front-line staff is carried out by upscaling the anti
poaching infrastructure, so that the home of the rhinoceros can be protected from poachers
and the species along with other endangered wildlife continue to thrive and multiply.
7.4

Conclusions

The following conclusions may be drawn from the discussion above:
1. The rhino horn has been traditionally used for more than 2000 years in Chinese
medicines
2. Internationally poaching has increased. This year till 10 th July, 2014 South Africa
lost 558 rhinos, while Kaziranga lost 21. Both the figures are very high.
3. In Kaziranga, attack from the north bank seems to have increased recently
4. There have been certain impact of increased prices of the horn in the international
market in increasing poaching
5. Poachers prefer night time and full moon nights for poaching, but could otherwise
strike at any time.
6. No fixed strategy would pay dividends; only a combination of strategies would beworkable to stop poaching.
7. Anti Poaching performance of the field staff in the year 2014 has been very good,
surpassing all previous records.
8. The Govt. of Assam has taken a series of anti poaching measures. However, theefforts must continue.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 141 of 402

CHAPTER 8
8

Stakeholders' Analysis and Responsibilities

Even though the primary responsibility of protection of the rhino in Kaziranga lies with thestaff of the Park, there are equally important other stakeholders, who if do not discharge
their duties (whether written down or otherwise, or in respect of the Fundamental Duties aslaid down in the Constitution of India, (g) to protect and improve the natural environment
including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures; ),very little protection can be achieved inside the Park under the currently prevailingcircumstances. For example, adverse publicity against staff and the Forest Department, inrespect of rhino poaching, can create a negative and demoralizing impact upon the field
staff who are, otherwise, doing their best possible duty within the limits of the given
resources and abilities. Such gaps in understanding can arise due to non exchange ofideas, issues and problems on a common platform.
The primary, secondary and key stakeholders were identified, and several consultations,
meetings, discussions, workshops were organized. The stakeholders meeting have helped
in better understanding and cooperation among the various stakeholders. A quick
stakeholder mapping helped in identifying and categorizing members of each stakeholder
community. Need assessment and gap analysis, i.e. the fringe village populations is in theprocess of identification using participatory approach. The initial findings indicate thatproviding alternate livelihoods to the fringe village population has emerged as the biggest
need.
Stakeholders relating to the management of the Park and support services namely the
Forest Department and other Govt. Departments have been brought together in enhancing
understanding of inter-departmental issues and constraints and forging new strategies andcoordination for long term management of Kaziranga. Experts from the global communities
i.e. researchers and park managers elsewhere in the rhino bearing areas in the world haveprovided valuable inputs in chalking out strategies for short term, medium term and longterm implementation.
The stakeholders identified are:
1. The Staff of Kaziranga
2. The Fringe Village Population
3. The Assam Forest Department
4. The Govt. of Assam• Revenue Department• Finance Department• PWD• Water Resources Department etc.
5. The Assam Police
6. The Govt of India• MoEF• NTCA• Home Ministry• CBI
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 142 of 402

• Ministry of Defence etc.
7. Local Population of Kaziranga Landscape▪ EDCs▪ Fringe Villages▪ Tea gardens
8. Tourists visiting Kaziranga
9. Local Civil Society Organizations
10. Local Business Entities dependent upon Tourism in Kaziranga• Hotel owners• Tour operators• Commercial establishments
11. CBOs and Organizations of Assam
12. IUCN
13. Donor Agencies
14. Wildlife and Other National and International NGOs
15. Wildlife Researchers
16. Research and Training Institutes
17. Service sector institutions
18. People of Assam
19. Print and Electronic Media of Assam
20. National and International Media
21. People of India
22. Corporate World (National and International)
23. World Communities
In order to make the consultations broad based and learn from the knowledge andexperience of other stakeholders, the various chapters of the draft Report were sharedwith some of the identified representative members of the various stakeholding groups andorganizations right from the local to the global. The opinion, suggestions and expert views
given by the various representatives of the stakeholders have been compiled in the Part
III of the Report. The Report draws heavily from the valuable inputs provided by thevarious stakeholders.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 143 of 402

CHAPTER 99

ABOUT KAZIRANGA

9.1

INTRODUCTION:

KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARK is a name known worldwide for its success in theconservation history of one horned Indian Rhinoceros. It is spread over an area of 430
sq km and there is further addition of 400 sq km area to the park. The management
history dates back to 1st June 1908 when it was first declared as a Reserve Forest. It
was subsequently upgraded to a Game Sanctuary in 1916, a Wildlife Sanctuary in1950 and finally a National Park in 1974. It also provides a natural habitat for a numberof rare, threatened and charismatic species. A symbol of dedication for theconservation of animals and their habitat, Kaziranga, with a National Park status
represents the single largest protected area to provide long term viable conservation.
Kaziranga National Park is an outstanding example representing significant ongoing
ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of natural
ecosystems consisting of several communities of plants and animals. Kaziranga
is the most important and significant natural habitat for in-situ conservation of biologicaldiversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value
from the point of view of science and Biodiversity Conservation with Rhino as the flagshipspecies.
9.2

GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION & CONSERVATION PROVINCES:

Situated on the southern bank of the Brahmaputra River at the foot of the Mikir - Karbi
Anglong Hills about 8 km from Bokakhat and 230 km east of Guwahati, the State capital of
Assam. After the proposed 6th Addition, the northern high bank of the river Brahmaputra
would form its northern boundary. The National Highway No.37 forms partly the southernboundary. Its coordinates are 26° 30' to 26° 45'N and 93° 05' to 93° 40'E.
As per UNESCO, it falls within the Burma Monsoon Forest (4.09.04) and within the Northeast Brahmaputra Valley (9A) Bio-geographical Province. It also represents the AssamArakan Geological Province. It falls within the Indo-Malayan Terrestrial Eco-Zone,
Brahmaputra Valley Semi Evergreen Eco-Region.
9.3

WORLD HERITAGE SITE:

The unique values and criteria made Kaziranga National Park to get inscribed on theWorld Heritage List of “Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural andnatural heritage” in the year 1985 under criteria N (ix) and N (x) of the Natural World
Heritage. Some of the significant conservation values of Kaziranga National Parkare enumerated below: • The largest Undivided and Representative area of Brahmaputra Valley flood
plain grassland and forest with associated large herbivores, avifauna andwet land values.
• The world's largest population of:• Greater One horned Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis)• Wild Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis)
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 144 of 402

•
•
•
•
•
9.4

• Swamp Deer (Cervus duvauceli ranjitsinghi)
Home to the Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis)
Significant population of Asiatic Elephant (Elephas maximus)
The junction of the Australasia flyway and Indo-Asian flyway
Exhibits considerable diversity in avifaunal species.
Provides an entire range of habitat from the floodplains to grassland to hill
evergreen forest communities.

IMPORTANT DATES & MILESTONES

Year

Event

1905

Preliminary notification of constitution of
Kaziranga Reserved Forest Issued

Remarks

On 1st June, 1908

1908

Kaziranga Reserve Forest constituted

1916

Declared a Game Reserve

1938

Opened to the public

1950

Declared a Wildlife Sanctuary

1954

Assam Rhinoceros Preservation Act passed

1968

Assam National Parks Act notified

1969

Preliminary notification of Kaziranga National
Park issued under the Assam National Parks
Act

1974

Final notification of Kaziranga National Park
issued11th February, 1974

1984

1st Addition preliminary notification issued

20th September, 1984

1985

Declared World Heritage Site by UNESCO

1990

Burapahar Range started with HQ at
Ghorakati

27th December, 1990

1997

Final notification of the 1st Addition issued

20th May, 1997

2002

Kukrakata RF was added to the Kaziranga
National Park under the Burapahar Range

2005

Declared Elephant Reserve

2005

Celebrates Centenary

2007

Declared Tiger Reserve

2010

Northern Range at Biswanath opened

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 145 of 402

9.5

FLORA & FAUNA:

The Kaziranga National Park is known to house 38 mammal species, about 553 birds
species, about 64 herpetofauna, 41 amphibian species, 42 piscifauna, and about 550
species of flora (of which 106 floras has been identified as rare and endangered).
The Sloth bear (Melarsus ursinus) is commonly found in the wooded areas of the parknear Kanchanjuri, Bimoli, Kathpara, Rangamotia etc. They are not sighted frequently due
to their natural habits. Estimated population of Sloth bear is about 40 - 50 in the park. The
Hoolock gibbons (Hylobates hoolock) visit the wooded areas of the park near Kanchanjuri
and Panbari R.F. Common langur (Presbytes entellus), Capped langur (Presbytes
pileatus) are also found in this area. During 1999 census operation, 139 capped langur
were found in the park. Rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta), Assamese macaque (Macaca
assamensis) are also found in the forested areas of the park. However their number issmall. Indian porcupine (Hystrix Indica), Hog badger (Aratonyx collaris), Fishing cat(Felis viverrina), etc. are some of the smaller animals found in the park. During 1999
census operation, 9 Hog badgers were found.
Amongst the reptilian fauna, python (Python molurus), common (Naja naja) and king cobra(Ophiophagus hannah), water monitor lizards Salvator monitor), Tortoises and Turtles ofvarious species, Indian gharial (Gavialus gangeticus) etc. may be mentioned.
The rivers, streams and the Beels inside the park are ideal habitat for the fresh water
fishes, reptiles and other aquatic forms of life. There are many places where thefreshwater turtles can be seen basking on the fallen tree trunks and on the banks of therivers. The Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus) was
once very common in the Moridifalu and Difalu rivers, but they are rarely seen these days.
The Gangetic dolphin (Platinista gangetica) is another common sight in the Dipholu river.
With their populations decimating in other parts of the country, Kaziranga can serve toprovide an important refuge to this mammal.
9.5.1

AVIFAUNA :The Kaziranga National Park supports a rich and varied bird life. In addition to numerous
species of resident birds it serves as the winter visiting ground to many migratory birds.
Altogether 478 species of birds, both migratory and resident, have been identified. The list
included 25 globally threatened and 21 near threatened species. The park has also been
identified as an Important Bird Area (IBA) by Birdlife International for the conservation of
the avifaunal species. The 25 globally threatened species are: The Swamp francolin(Francolinus gularis), Lesser White-fronted Goose (Anser erythropus), Ferruginous
Pochard (Aythya nyroca), Baer’s Pochard (A. Baeri), Blyth’s Kingfisher (Alcedo hercules),Pale-capped pigeon (Columba punicea), Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis),
Nordmann’s Greenshank (Tringa guttifer), Black bellied tern (Sterna acuticauda), Pallas’s
Fishing Eagle (Haliaetus leucoryphus), Greater spotted eagle (Aquilla clanga), Imperial
Eagle (A. Heliaca), Lesser Kestrel (Falco naumanni), White-bellied Heron (Ardea insignis),Spot-billed Pelican (Pelecanus phillippensis), Dalmatian Pelican (P. Crispus), Greater
Adjutant (Leptoptilos dubius), Lasser adjutant (L. Javanicus), Hodgson’s Bushchat(Saxicola insignis), Rufous-vented prinia (Prinia burnesii), Bristled Grassbird (Chaetornis
striatus), Marsh Babbler (Pellorneum palustre), Jerdon’s Babbler (Chrysomma altirostre),
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 146 of 402

Black- breasted Parrotbill (Paradoxornis flavirostris) and Finn’s Weaver (Ploceus
megarhynchus). There is a breeding colony of the pelicans near Boralimora in the Eastern
Range where as many as six hundred nests were observed. When the chicks grow up andthey are taken out by their parents for fishing in the Beels it presents a very interesting andimpressive sight of hundreds of pelicans moving in army formation. In addition to thebreeding colonies of the pelicans, there are large breeding colonies of egrets, cormorants
and the darter.

Kaziranga National Park consists of vast alluvial grasslands along with its 6 additions andthere Reserved Forests comprising an area of 1055 Sq Km. This area supports, in addition
to a large tiger population, mega-herbivores like Rhino, Elephant, Buffalo, Swamp deer andSambar. This assemblage along with numerous hog deer and wild boar forms a healthy
prey base of tiger and other carnivores. There are 108 tigers in the Park which makes it
one of the densely populated tiger reserve in the country.
9.6

WILD ANIMAL CENSUS AND POPULATION:

The following Table shows the existing animal populations in the Kaziranga National Park:Sl No
Wildlife
Population
Census/ Estimation
Year
1

Rhinoceros

2329

2

Elephant

1163

2011

3

Tiger

111

2012

4

Wild Buffalo

1937

2008

5

Swamp Deer

836

2013

6

Hog Deer

35,00020127

Sambar

1100

2012

8

Wild Boar

18000

2012

9

Non Human Primates

4214

2009

9.7

2013

ADDITIONS TO THE KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARK:

The following additions have been proposed/ effected to the original area of 430 sq km of
the notified Kaziranga National Park in 1974:NAME
STATUSNOTIFICATIONAREADISTRICTNUMBER(Ha)NUMBERDATEFINAL

FIRST ADDITION TO
KNP
SECOND ADDITION TO
KNP
THIRD ADDITION TO
KNP
FOURTH ADDITION TO

FINAL

FINAL (De-PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

FINAL (DeNovo)
PRPOSED

FOR/WL/72
2/68
FRS.253/90/
198
FRS.89/200
2/112
FRS.101/85/
3
FRS89/2002

11th FEB
1974
28th MAY
1997
12th JULY
2010
31st MAY
1985
10th APRIL

KNP

42993

646.98NAGAON AND
SIBSAGARNAGAON AND
SONITPUR
GOLAGHAT

69.76

GOLAGHAT

89.754NAGAON

4378.8Page No. 147 of 402

KNP
FIFTH ADDITION TO
KNP
SIXTH ADDITION TO
KNP
TOTAL AREA (in Ha.)

Novo)
PROPOSEDPROPOSED(De-Novo)/129
FRS.126/15/
2
FRS.89/200
2/13

2012
13th JUNE
1985
22nd DEC
2008

115.36

GOLAGHAT

40150

SONITPUR

88443.65

So far, the 1st and 4th Additions to the National Park have been fully handed over to thePark authorities. The 2nd Addition has been partly effected. Rest of the areas are yest to behanded over to the Park authorities.
9.8

Kaziranga Forest Types & Habitat

The floristic composition of the Kaziranga National Park comprises of following forest types(Champion & Seth, 1968):• Eastern Wet Alluvial Grasslands (4D/2S2)• Assam Alluvial Plains Semi-Evergreen Forests (2B/C1a)• Tropical Moist Mixed Deciduous Forests (3C3)• Eastern Dillenia Swamp Forests (4D/SS5)
The habitat consists of (area-wise break up in %):• Woodland
27.95 %
• Short grass
3.01 %• Tall Grass
61.01 %
• Beels
5.96 %• Jiya Difaloo
0.97 %• Mori Difaloo
0.70 %• Sand
0.40 %PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 148 of 402

GOVERNMENT OF ASSAMKAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKDETAILED REPORTONISSUES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONSFORLONG TERM PROTECTIONOF

THE GREATER ONE HORNEDRHINOCEROSIN

KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKPURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF

THE HON'BLE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

PART IIPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 149 of 402

CHAPTER 10
10 THE PROPOSED SOLUTION FRAMEWORK
Based on primary data collection, discussions and consultations with stakeholders,secondary literature review of laws, acts, policies, research findings and reports, andinputs from experts from local, national and international levels, a solution framework has
been proposed which is multi pronged and multi disciplinary in approach. The figure below
depicts the proposed solutions framework for Kaziranga.

The key to successful long term management of Kaziranga and protection of rhinos is afine balance between the Habitat management and the growth and development of thepeople, which can be pivoted on sound policies, frameworks, strategies and protocols
based on technology and low carbon infrastructure. However, it would require a very goodplanning as well as implementation maintaining the fine balance between conservationand growth, which would ultimately rest on sound budgeting and financing principles andregular flow of funds. A very strong monitoring and evaluation, project management andaudit would ensure that the flow of resources is in the right direction.
Of course, it is no denying that nothing can be achieved without a well trained, wellmotivated and skilled manpower. Human resource management would, therefore, be oneof the first and foremost of the challenges to be overcome while implementing the
proposed solution framework.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 150 of 402

The proposed solution framework is as below:1. Habitat:
1. Erosion Control strategies
2. Improvement strategies
3. Extension Strategies
4. Retrofitting Strategies
5. Informed Management
2. People
1. Front-Line Staff
1. SMART GUARD
2. SMART COMMUNICATION
3. Technology & Infrastructure Interventions
4. Operation & Maintenance
5. Staff Welfare
2. Fringe Villages Development
1. Livelihoods & Employment
2. Education
3. Health
4. Insurance and Social Security
5. Green Development Initiatives
3. Kaziranga Tourism
3. Policy
1. Amendments in the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
2. Wildlife Crime Detection, Reporting and Conviction
3. Creating Kaziranga Landscape Authority
4. Kaziranga Landscape
1. Kaziranga Watershed
2. RF & PA Network
3. Corridors
4. Other areas
5. Kaziranga Landscape Development Framework
1. Green Growth
2. Tourism
3. Modern Means of Communication
4. Land use Zonation
6. Rhino Range Expansion Project
4. Implementation
1. Immediate measures
2. Short Term measures
3. Medium Term Measures
4. Long Term Measures
5. Cost Estimates & Sources of Funding

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 151 of 402

CHAPTER 11
11

Habitat Strategies

Six specific strategies have been proposed for habitat of the rhinoceros in Kaziranga.
These are:
1. Erosion Control
2. Habitat Improvement
3. Extension of Habitat
4. Retrofitting Strategies
5. Encroachment Eviction
6. Informed Management
11.1

Erosion Control Programme (ECP)The beginning of Chapter 2 highlights the basic issue of habitat loss of Kaziranga by wayof erosion. The areas lost are quality habitat areas. Some of them, such as the present
Debeswari formation (since it was lost to the river somewhere between 1914 to 1972, andformed again in course of time in subsequent years) is a very critical habitat for the
Eastern Swamp Deer and the Bengal Florican. Today, Kaziranga cannot afford to lose thishabitat to the Brahmaputra, as it may prove very costly for these two species. Currently,
erosion is going on. It is apprehended that by the end of the 2014 flood season, somemore of Debeswari area would be eroded.
There is another issue which was not discussed in Chapter 2, is the threat to the entire
Kaziranga National Park, if by any chance the river Brahmaputra were to enter into thedead Dhansiri (Mora Dhansiri) channel by breaching the existing embankment east of
Dhanbari near the Bokakhat township. Once Brahmaputra main channel enters into Mora
Dhansiri (currently the river is only less than 350 meters short of hitting theembankment), it has the potential to destroy the Park habitat by splitting it east to west in
two parts.
Erosion is very severe on the eastern bank above Dhanbari, followed by Debeswari upto
Sitalmari through Arimora on the south bank. There are chances of deposition and further
aggregation of landmass west of Sitalmari. There are also possibilities of consolidation
between Debeswari and Arimora. However, the exact ground configuration would be only
clear after the 2014 floods are over. Currently, inspection of the bank line shows thatthough Arimora IB was pulled down and the Beat Office was washed away in 2013
September, this year in the 2nd week of June, 2014, the Arimora point completely went into
water including the road behind it and the group of trees on the bank, forcing us to makeanother road further south. The river is hitting the bank in south-west direction, probably
after the water gets deflected in that direction at the Buroi river point. At Buroi, the rivergets pushed south-west ward with great force. If this trend continues, there could bepossibilities of the Brahmaputra entering the barbeel through the Siga bridge (about 2.3
kilometer west of Arimora) or through the streams about 900 meters east of the point, thewaters could hit the Diffaloo river near Holalpath which is also 2.5 kilometers away fromthe bank. In either case, Naobhangi, Arimora, Gobrai, Kartika, Sitalmari etc. are likely to
become part of the river and reappear as char areas in near future. These are again prime
habitats of the rhinoceros. It is now expected that within this season itself we may have to
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 152 of 402

shift again the Arimora beat location further south, as the river may erode another 500
meters in a year or two.
It needs to be mentioned here that in the past there were attempts to control erosion by
the Park authorities. There were several porcupine structures put around the Arimora areain 2010 under a centrally sponsored scheme of the NTCA. However, all that has been veryharshly dismantled by the river, and today there is no trace of them. Further, under the
ADB assisted FREMAA project, a proposal in Tranch-2 has been proposed for erosion
control of the river. The proposal is currently waiting for nod from the MoEF, New Delhi for
Environment Clearance. The author has briefly examined the proposal, which consists ofsluice gates, porcupine structures and embankments costing Rs. 137 crore. According to
the author, the FREMAA proposal would require certain modifications as per therequirements of habitat management. Kaziranga and Brahmaputra have a uniue
relationship. It may be worthwhile to mention here in brief some of the the intricacies ofthis relationship.
11.1.1 Flood – A Boon for Kaziranga
As already mentioned elsewhere in part I of the Report, flood is a boon for Kaziranga. Thevery existence of Kaziranga is due to the interplay of the Brahmaputra river and its flood
waters and silt load. First of all, the floods serve as annual hygiene and cleansing
operation (which is manually not possible to be done). Kaziranga supports a large numberof wildlife, including most of the large mammals such as rhino, tiger, elephant, buffalo,sambar, swamp deer and hog deer. These live bodies act as hosts for many kind ofbacteria which often are passed on in the habitat through defecation. If these are notcleansed regularly, chances of spread of disease and epidemic become high in course oftime. The flood water washes away all this annually, thereby keeping the hygiene of thePark in high order.
Secondly, fresh silt is deposited in the habitat which in turn gets enriched in nutrients andminerals. Thus, productivity of the habitat does not decrease, rather it is maintained.
Thirdly, this also applies to the large number of water bodies whose water gets replenishedafresh with new water annually. The water bodies gets charged for supporting wildlife
during the winter and dry season that would follow. Kaziranga largely has never faced
water crisis, and ample availability of water through a network of about 300 small and large
water bodies, is made for the wildlife. This is one of the reasons why visibility of wildlife isso high in Kaziranga compared to other Parks elsewhere in the world.
Fourthly, the water bodies of Kaziranga, due to a very high level of protection accorded,
act as rich nurseries/ hatcheries and fertile spawning ground for variety of fishes and otheraquatic fauna. During the floods, the fledglings get the opportunity to get into themainstream and move onward enriching the aquatic faunal life downstream. Fifthly, theKaziranga Tiger Reserve is unique in supporting fresh water mangroves in parts of its
habitat. The Barringtonia acutangula is the fresh water mangrove growing mostly in flood
affected areas of the Tiger Reserve. This unique forest type requires annual floods for its
continued nutrient supply and survival. If floods cease to occur, this forest type may die
down. Sixthly, one of the great effects of high floods is that it suppresses the invasive

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 153 of 402

weeds such as mimosa selectively. If the weeds remain under water for some time, theynaturally tend to die. Thus, floods help in weed control as well.
Therefore, floods are a must for Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. The higher the flood levels, thebetter is the habitat. However, more sever the flood, more is the casualty and loss ofwildlife. This calls for creation of more highlands, a topic which has been dealt withseparately in the Chapter.
11.1.2 Staggered Inflow and Outflow of Flood Waters
The Kaziranga National Park (as notified originally) and its 1 st Addition areas share about
70 km of bank line with the Brahmaputra river on the south bank side. The bank line ismostly vertical all along, only broken at places by the large mammals who have maderegular tracks for their movement to the river and beyond. There are several ghats which
are used by the staff for river patrolling and navigation. There are more than 25 major
channel entry points along this bank line, and numerous minor channels through whichflood waters can enter the park area. Since the Brahmaputra varies considerably in depth
upto 60-100 ft at places, the different water channels meet the river at different elevations.
This variation in elevation of the water channels at the bank leads to staggered flooding of
the Park. The lowest and deepest channels gets flooded first, and flooding is observed tohappen from west to east. As the water level rises, more channels get flooded and thewater flow reverses. Similarly while flood on the decline, its the higher elevation channels
which get drained out first, followed by the deeper channels towards the end.
This leads to setting up of current and counter current in the Park, thus, helping in
generating the required natural force for cleansing and nutrient cycling within the Park.
Therefore, prior to taking up any engineering enterprise for control of erosion in andaround the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, the river and channel dynamics (and the lotic
ecosystem comprising of the river and its numerous streams) must be taken into account.
The Kaziranga-Brahmaputra bank line has considerable topographical and vegetationalvariation all along.
11.1.3 Proposed Erosion Control Measures
Several rounds of discussion took place between the Kaziranga authorities and the Water
Resource department authorities. The following possibilities have emerged which need tobe pursued after obtaining all clearances from the Govt.
1. The FREMAA proposal in its current form needs to be totally modified andresubmitted after mutual consultations
2. In the short term, the embankment south of Dhanbari needs to be secured forwhich necessary permission may be given the Forest & Environment Department.
3. An experimental bank line erosion control mechanism using geo-bags/ geo-tubes
and geo-mats needs to be tried along the Debeswari bank line subject to thecondition that there should not be any change/ damage / blockade of the existing
channels along the bank line.
4. As a futuristic experiment, since Kaziranga has already lost about 84 sq km of land,
the following may be tried with caution:
1. Extend the Debeswari experiment from all along the south bank line
2. Attempt to reclaim chapori land which are within 500 meters of the bankline bya mix of engineering intervention and and vegetative stabilization.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 154 of 402

3. Then, secure the new bank line.
4. Since the river has entered about 7 km inside on the eastern bank, attemptshould be made for recovery of part of land by way of causing siltation near
Dhanbari.
5. Dredging of the river at certain places, and dumping of the silt at certain otherplaces (such as at Serial 2 above) to reclaim more land.
5. The bank line migration around Kaziranga must be studies in detail.
6. The river profiling and acoustic survey should be carried out annually.
11.2

Habitat Improvement Programme (HIP)

The existing habitat within the originally notified Kaziranga National Park and the 1 st
addition areas, as already mentioned I Chapter 2, have undergone / undergoingdegradation due to various biotic and abiotic factors. The park authorities have been
carrying out certain improvement measures from time to time subject to quantum of fundavailable. There has been some improvements or even temporary reprieve, but the issues
continue. There seems to be a requirement of long term consistent programme of habitat
improvement to be adopted for the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve as a whole with adequate
infrastructural and funding support. The following programmes need to be institutionalized:
1. Invasive Weed Control
2. Encroachment of grassland by Simul and other woody growth
3. Desiltation of water bodies
4. Highland creation and maintenance
5. Biotic Interference Control: Grazing and Fishing
6. Water harvesting
7. Forest Fire Control
For invasive weed control, in addition to manual methods, effectiveness of herbicides assuggested by Richard Emslie may be tried. Weeds also come due to nearness ofagricultural crops and human habitation next to the Park/ Tiger Reserve boundaries. It is
proposed:
1. To maintain a No Activity Buffer Zone of 500 meters at certain select places along
the boundary, especially in Eastern, Central and Western Ranges where
agricultural fields and habitations are just next to the Park boundary. Habitations
falling in such zones should be suitably rehabilitated, and adequate compensation
should be paid for loss of agricultural land.
2. Use of pesticides and insecticides should be banned in the landscape area. Anyloss of productivity should be adequately compensated for till production levels do
not bounce back to the original levels.
3. Mechanical weeding by resorting to ploughing before flowering may be tried
4. Tested and safe herbicides may be used for removing unwanted growth andvegetation.
5. Depending upon the efficacy of the method adopted and cost involved, annual
areas for operation should be demarcated
6. The cycle at serial 5 above may have to be repeated after passage of time.
Trees such as Simul are heavily encroaching upon the grassland with profuse
regeneration. These are the vast grasslands that are plain with slight undulation on the
ground, broken by water bodies. The only way out appears to be mechanical removal
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 155 of 402

using logging equipment after the grasses have been burnt during late January to March,
to make the operation less costly and sustainable. The other option could be, for the areas
which are already covered by Simul regeneration, to cut down the trees below the soil
surface in the month of September/ October and burn the area during January-February.
Desiltation and highland creation could go hand in hand. Highlands to be raised must beplanned and mapped before-hand. Similarly, water bodies and parts thereof should be
identified well in advance based on ecological and water flow dynamics of the area. An
annual plan of operation should be made in advance for these activities.
As regards water harvesting, structures should be built very cautiously. Since there is no
dearth of water bodies in Kaziranga, the only threat is that in extreme drought conditions,water could become scarce. By desiltation, the situation should improve considerably.
However, it is observed that barring the deeper river channels, the higher elevation
channels do not store any water. Small causeways with strong foundation should be madeso that some water in the upstream level is retained in different stages in cascadingmanner. As of now, there does not seem to be any need to digging artificial tanks in thePark. However, at landscape level, there would be serious shortage of water for the
wildlife, as most of the areas would be highland. Therefore, water harvesting structures
needs to be planned in the landscape outside the core areas. Such structures could also
include artificial water channels, and improving of the natural water channels of the 4 thorder and above in the landscape, based on appropriate hydrological study and design.
Fire is extensively used in Kaziranga National Park for grassland management. Startingfrom the end of February to early April, fire is set to the vast grasslands in a phasedmanner. Burning is a very important management tool for maintaining the grasslands(though scientifically speaking, such a large scale burning releases lot of carbon in theatmosphere, and definitely one cannot term this management practice as “green”
management technique, which is a major contributor of CO 2.)
Fire is so much a part of the Kaziranga management that talking of fire fighting appears to
be out of place. There is another reason for this topic to be out of place, namely slash andburn agriculture practice of the tribes residing on the hills opposite the Park/Tiger Reserve.
Several hectares of forests are set on fire randomly and continue burning for days together(again releases a lot of carbon in the atmosphere. Slash and burn system, according to theauthor, has a very serious negative connotation with climate change).
Having said that fire fighting is a topic out of place here, the relevance of fire fighting
comes in the backdrop of landscape level management. It may happen that the structural
corridors passing through thick populations may pose a major fire threat in future.
Therefore, it is proposed that over a period of time, the forest fire fighting capabilities be
initiated and augmented.
Grazing Control:
It has been observed that the local population living on the fringe of the Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve often let their cattle loose in the Reserve to graze. This problem has persisted
since long without any solution. The field officers find it difficult to come in directconfrontation with the local population on a regular basis. The cattle are highly
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 156 of 402

unproductive and are not stall fed. Since they are not stall fed, the cow dung, which
otherwise is a source of cooking energy/ bio-gas, is not available for any practical utility forthe owners of the cattle. The other associated problem of stray dogs from these villages
entering the Park boundary. It is possible that these dogs may be attacking the newly born
fawns and babies of other animals. Further, such attacks would be adversely affecting the
growth of the populations concerned, especially endangered animals such as swamp deer.
Electric Fencing has been put at several places in the Park, and seems to be a miserable
failure. The reason being that when the villagers on the fringe feel the threat from wild
animals who would raid their crop, they see to it that the fence works. But on otheroccasions, they themselves often damage it. Another reason for failure of electric fencing
in Kaziranga is the continuous migration of wild animals, especially during floods. To
facilitate smooth migration, the fencing has to be removed perforce.
The experiments of stall feeding would not be successful. The main reason being that theAssamese community, and this is also true of most other communities (except Nepali,
Eastern UP and Bihari) are not in any traditional habit of stall feeding, and moreover, thekind of infrastructure and man-power investment that would typically go into stall feeding(such as regular cleaning, collection and disposal of cow dung, getting feeds, regularly
serving the cattle etc.) is totally missing from these communities. Therefore, preaching stallfeeding and hybrid cows may not work at all.
The only solution to the author appears to be an enterprise of dairy cooperatives in thelandscape, where each of the owners are given “cattle shares” and dividends based on thenumber of shares that a household owns. The rest of it should be managed professionally.
Fishing Control:
Fishing is another vice plaguing the Park. Though it cannot be strictly termed as Habitat
degradation factor, and hence there cannot be a Habitat Improvement programme forfishing control. Fishing is a serious law and order issue and finds mention here along withgrazing control.
Fishing is prevalent in entire parts of the 6 th Addition areas, Burapahar Range (along theNH37), along the banks of the Mora Dhansiri and Mora Diffaloo rivers in the Eastern,
Central and Western Ranges wherever there are villages near the boundary. Fishing on
the North Bank is more organized, commercial in nature and on a bigger scale, while on
the south bank, its for household consumption and local markets. Another phenomenon
that has been noticed of late is community fishing by the fringe villages on certain festive
occasions such as Magh Bihu, Bohag Bihu etc. In such community fishing, people joinfrom certain remote areas beyond Kaziranga such as Rupohi, Laokhowa, Puranigodam
etc. who come in hired trucks with fishing nets and baskets. There have been at least two
skirmishes with such fishermen and on both the occasions, it followed by burning ofcamps, blockade of the NH37 and demand of arrest/ transfer/ suspension of the
Burapahar Range Officer. These are being done allegedly to exert the community's
traditional fishing rights. Further, it has been observed that in most cases the poachers
take the shelter of these fishing communities for getting in and out of the Park. Especiallyin the north bank, it is the fishermen who use their country boats to cross the river with theteam of poachers.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 157 of 402

Possible solutions may be:
1. Take legal recourse to the habitual offenders
2. Constant river patrolling to act as deterrent
3. Seizure of boats, nets and arrest of offenders
4. Awareness campaign through EDCs on the south bank
5. Formation of EDCs on the north bank
6. Alternate livelihood options, including creation of fisheries through EDCs
Habitat Management Infrastructure:
Habitat improvement programme for the Park/ Tiger Reserve would require certain
infrastructure to be created on permanent basis along with necessary staff and runningcost. Currently there is no infrastructure to carry out the improvement works, and the Park
authorities have to depend upon hired vehicles which not only becomes costly, but also is
not available all throughout. The following infrastructure is suggested for the Tiger
Reserve:
1. All Terrain Vehicles (8x8 Drive Amphibious Off-Road Vehicle with tracked
configuration/ wheels)
2. Tractors
3. Excavators and Dumpers
4. Forestry Crawler Dozers
5. Trucks
6. Forestry Logging Equipment
7. Forest Fire Fighting Equipment
However, in order to make the best use of the equipment, their regular maintenance, a
new cadre of personnel is required to be recruited along with trained people to handle theequipment and drive the gears. Therefore, the Habitat Improvement Programme must take
into account the following:1. Adequate trained manpower for all mechanical equipment
2. Availability of spare parts and proper maintenance3. Setting up of in-house mechanical workshop
11.3

Extension of Habitat

On the face of the fact that 4 additions to Kaziranga National Park are pending since 1985,
and this Report talks of taking some more areas! However, this Reports proposes achange of strategy in this regard, subject to its approval by the Government of Assam.
It is no denying that the current system of land acquisition is very lengthy, difficult toimplement and land prices may change at the time of final hand-over leading to further
delays in land acquisition.
The following strategies for private land procurement for Kaziranga are proposed:1. All land for Kaziranga should be procured at prevalent market rates
2. The market rates can be determined by the concerned Deputy Commissioner by
averaging sale value of last three sales for that class of land.
3. The Deputy Commissioner should certify that the land in question is nonencumbered.
4. Payment must be made to the owner of the land outright by way of cheque/ ECSPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 158 of 402

5. Possession of land must be taken immediately
6. GPS readings of the corners of the plot should be recorded
7. The area must be immediately secured against any possible encroachment.
8. The land should be registered in the name of Kaziranga Landscape Authority or any
such authority Govt. may deem fit.
9. Once the land is in possession of the Authority, the procedure for declaration of
National Park or Sanctuary should be followed as per the Wildlife (Protection) Act,1972.
In case of Govt. land, the procedure of the Assam Land Revenue Regulation may befollowed as usual for allotment of the land to the Kaziranga Landscape Authority, if
constituted. Once the land is transferred and mutated in the name of the Authority, theprocedure for declaration of National Park or Sanctuary should be followed as per the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
The third strategy for land procurement is to create community reserves where people,
NGOs, foundations and other philanthropic minded entities, individuals and corporates
may offer non encumbered land to Kaziranga authorities only for conservation of wildlife.
These chunks of land could be, then, treated as blocks or compartments of Kaziranga.
These could be even named after the donors or their patrons.
All land transactions should happen at market rates including payment of revenue andduties to the Govt.
11.3.1 Recommendations of the AsRSG of IUCN
The Asian Rhino Specialist Group by IUCN had recommended a series of projects
including one for extension of rhino habitat for Kaziranga. The group delineated a total of
20 projects for rhino conservation for India at a cost of US$ 16,239,000.00. This amounttranslates to Rs. 100,68,18,000.00 at the current exchange rates. However, it should be
noted that these are based on the estimates in 1996, which is about almost two decades
back. There would be significant cost escalations in these values in today's price terms.
The comments of the AsRSG about the need of habitat extension for Kaziranga can beseen at Page 44 of the Report. To emphasize its importance, the same is quoted here, “...
However, there is need to expand the habitat for the rhino in Kaziranga. Much of theoriginal area of the Park has been lost due to erosion along the Brahmaputra (Northern)side and to human encroachment and development along the the southern border.
Particularly needed are extension into higher areas not affected by the annual floods”. The
group also kept a provision of US$ 900,000.00 only for habitat extension into the higher
areas. This amounts to Rs. 5,58,00,000.00.
In view of high cost of land, it is proposed that this recommendation of the AsRSG be
implemented at market rate strategies as mentioned in the previous section. An annual
fund of Rs. 50 crore may be created for this purpose. The fund could be used to build core/
critical areas/ buffer areas and corridors, and or retrofitting of these areas by adding
additional land.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 159 of 402

11.3.2 Possible Extension Areas
Agaratoli Range: All the areas falling between the Mathaori (Embankment) and Kaziranga(from Dhanbari to Sukhani)
Kohora: Expansion and consolidation of the corridors, including some tea garden areas
Bagori: Expansion and consolidation of the corridors, including some tea garden areas
Burapahar: Bagser RF, Kamakhya Hill RF, Expansion and consolidation of the corridors,
including some tea garden areas
Burachapori/ Laokhowa: Riverine areas west of Kalia Bhomora bridge measuring about
250 sq. km. right up to the Singri hills in Sonitpur district. Kuchmara RF which is fully

encroached. This may be treated as 1st Addition to the Burapahar Wildlife Sanctuary.
Karbi Anglong: Entire forested area including and north of Mikir Hills/ Kaliani RF
Based on the above indications, a tentative list has been prepared below of the possible
areas for immediate extension of the Kaziranga National Park/ Tiger Reserve. This isbased on actual reconnaissance survey and areas available with the Forest Department orland with the Govt. The suggested areas for immediate extension of the kaziranga Tiger
Reserve are:1. Bagser RF
2. Chirang Pahar (Fresh survey to be done, based on the PRF notification)
3. Kamakhya Hill RF
4. Other Areas:
1. Gakhirekhaiti Village near the Kaliabhomora bridge towards Kaliabor side
2. Areas between NH37 and Kaziranga at certain places
3. Govt. land/ VGR / PGR Sukhani to Japaripathar
4. Govt. land north of embankment from Japaripathar to Dhanbari
5. SF Plantation area near Dwar Bagori
6. Govt land near Harmoti camp
7. Encroachment on the south side of Deopnai Bridge to be removed and corridor
restored
8. Govt. land in and around Banderdubi
9. All Chapories outside the 6th Addition but within the proposed landscape
11.4

Corridor Retrofitting Strategies

There are geographically three different type of corridors that one needs to address torestore connectivity, namely:
1. Corridors on NH37 which link Kaziranga to Karbi Anglong
2. Corridors elsewhere which are needed for safe migration of long range animals
such as elephants, rhinoceros and tigers.
3. Functional corridors which wild animals use such as agricultural fields and crop
lands for which a different strategy needs to be adopted.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 160 of 402

11.4.1 Corridor Retrofitting on NH37
The corridors on the NH37 between Jakhlabandha and Bokakhat fall in a different
category all together, as they are subject to the various orders that may be passed in thematter before the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal. As of now, as per the current orders,the PWD(NH), Govt. of Assam would prepare a DPR for the fly overs that would passthrough these corridors giving exact alignments. Thereafter, the next main work would beto study each of the alignments and carry out detailed survey on the ground. The park
authorities and the PWD(NH) teams must be in constant interaction during the DPR
preparation process so that corridors structurally connect well both sides of the NH37 andensure safe passage to the wild animals.
The following strategies are suggested for this set of corridors:1. Carry out a complete survey of the corridor area right from the Park boundary to theforested tracts of Karbi Anglong, and prepare a detailed map of the corridor.
2. All habitations, tea gardens, agricultural fields, dhabas, hotels, and other obstaclesin the corridors such as deep fishery, boundary walls, long fencing etc. must be
identified and recorded in the map of the corridor.
3. All land parcels that would be required to retrofit the corridor structurally on bothsides of the NH37 should be identified along with ownership and class of land.
4. While doing the survey, representatives of Forest, Civil Administration, and Karbi
Anglong Autonomous Development Council should be present.
5. Consultation with local stakeholders, Gaon Panchayats, EDCs, citizenry in generaland local public representatives should be carried out while delineating the corridor.
6. A detailed plan and estimate of retrofitting the corridor should be prepared once thegeographic limits are finalized.
7. Due compensation rates, if required as per prevailing rates, should be obtained
from the Concerned Deputy Commissioner.
8. The final plan should have cost estimates and methods of restoration of the corridor
including afforestation activities, if so required.
It is suggested that the NH37 corridors should be made an integral part of the Kaziranga
National Park by adopting the strategies suggested in the “Extension of Habitat” strategies.
11.4.2 Other Corridors
In addition to the corridors on the NH37 between Jakhlabandha and Bokakhat, there aremany wild animal corridors scattered all around Kaziranga, notable among them are
Nambor-Doigrung-Garampani, chapories of Majuli and from thence to Lakhimpur, river
channels on the north bank such as Jia Bhorali, Buroi, Gabharu, Borgang, towards west
across Silghat, Kaliabhomora to Laokhowa and Orang National Park.
As per the Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP) preparation guidelines, about 1.5 km buffer
around these corridors on both the sides need to be delineated showing different land
uses and villages, forest areas that fall in the corridors. If more than 50% of the land-use/
land parcel falls within buffer, the entire land parcel/ village/ forest compartment/ block
would be required to be included in the corridor. The concerned DFO is required to do adetailed mapping of the corridors in association with the Civil Administration and the sameneed to be notified as a corridor under the Tiger Conservation Plan of the Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 161 of 402

The notified corridors shall be regularly monitored and watched. Requisite infrastructural
support to the concerned DFO would have to be provided from the KTR for maintenanceof the corridor. If the corridor is highly fragmented, retrofitting planning may have to beresorted to as already outlined for the NH37. There would be provision to form EDCs as
well, if required.
Support may be provided to the concerned DFO for maintaining the structural andfunctional parts of the corridors such as camps, watch towers, wireless communication,
remuneration to staff etc.
11.4.3 Functional Corridors
Along with the existing structural corridors, as in case of corridors of NH37, the areas
falling outside the forest, especially the agricultural land use would need special attention,
once the same has been identified and delineated.
The following provisions are suggested for functional parts of the corridors:
1. No land use change to non agricultural/ commercial/ housing type land use shouldbe allowed.
2. No deep uncovered wells, or straight edged fisheries should be allowed.
3. Provision for life, cattle and crop insurance should be made4. Immediate compensation should be paid on damage of life and property
5. Provision of watch towers for keeping eye on migrating rhinos, so that poachers
cannot take aim.
6. Setting up Local Protection Squads (LPS) on the lines of the experiment done in the
Laokhowa and Burachapori WLS.
7. Promoting green development, green infrastructure in the corridor areas
8. Incentivising and providing alternate livelihood options to the stakeholders of thecorridors.
11.4.4 No Activity Buffer Zone
It is often observed that there are certain areas on the fringe of the Kaziranga National
Park where there are habitations and intense agricultural activities, including grazing andfishing. This translates to continuous presence of people in the close vicinity of the Park
starting from dawn to dusk, and may encroach even into the night depending uponvisibility. As already stated at the beginning of this Chapter, the offenders of law andpoachers take full advantage of the human shield and enter into the park with bad
intentions of rhino poaching. It becomes very difficult for the staff on duty to resort to action
or to distinguish the alleged offender from the genuine villagers. Further, during ambush,there are chances of accidental fire hitting an innocent villager which may lead tocomplicated law and order situations. Another factor is the straying of wild animals in the
nearby farms and damaging crop, often injuring/ killing people.
In order to minimize the ill effects of proximity between the Park and the people, it is
proposed that the vulnerable patches be studied and surveyed thoroughly. After detailed
consultation and taking people into confidence, a 500 m “No Activity Buffer Zone” may be
drawn on the ground. IF there are habitations, those may be shifted to model villages built
at the cost of the Kaziranga Landsacpe Authority. If there are agricultural land, adequate
market rate compensation should be awarded. There also could be loss of livelihoods due
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 162 of 402

to loss of access to fishing etc, which also must be accommodated by way of alternate
livelihoods or additional financial assistance to the affected families.
11.5

Eviction of Encroachments

It must be mentioned here without any prejudice that all the territories of the Kaziranga
National Park under the control of the Forest Department are 100% encroachment free.
These territories are the originally notified Kaziranga National Park, the 1 st Addition to KNP,
the 4th Addition to KNP and part of the 2 nd Addition to KNP (in possession of the Park
Authorities). The other areas which are either not finally notified (6 th Addition to KNP), or
not handed over by the Revenue Department to the Park Authorities (part of 2 nd Addition to
KNP, 3rd Addition to KNP and the 5 th Addition to KNP) either do have encroachment or
have traces of encroachment.
The latest victim of encroachment has been the 5 th Addition areas which were forciblyoccupied by a certain section of people in 2012 and 2013. It was preceded byencroachments in parts of the 3rd Addition areas in 2005. These encroachments are in theform of small huts, the total number at the time of writing of this Report being about 62 (30in the 3rd Addition areas and 32 in the 5 th Addition areas). There are certain khutis in the 6 thAddition areas. Although no one has any rights as of now, and all rights have been
extinguished by the then Collector appointed by the Govt. of Assam to enquire into anddetermine the existence, the nature and extent of any rights/ claims alleged to exist in
favour of any person or persons in or over any land in the proposed additions to Kaziranga
National Park as per procedure laid down in section 19 to 26 A (both exclusive except (c)of sub-section (2) of section 24) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, read with section 35of the said Act.
Views of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:
It is pertinent to mention here that the entire matter of the proposed Additions to theKaziranga National Park must also be seen in the light of orders of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court vide order dated 12.12.1996 passed in WP(C) No. 202 of 1995 in the matter of T.N.
Godavarman Trirumulpad –vs- Union of India others which holds that “the word forest must
be understood according its Dictionary meaning. This description covers all statutorily
recognized Forest whether designated as regard protected or otherwise for the purpose
section -2 (I) of the Forests Conservation Act. The term Forest land occurring in section -2
will not only include Forest as understood in that Dictionary sense but also any area
recorded as Forest in the Govt. records irrespective of the ownership. This is how it has tobe understood for the purpose of section-2 of the Act. The provision enacted in the Forest
Conservation Act, 1980 for the Conservation of Forest and the matter connected herewith
must apply clearly to all Forests so understood irrespective of the ownership orclassification thereof.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court has further directed, under the above
mentioned order dated 12.12.1996, the State Governments to:“ (i)Identify areas which are “forests” irrespective of whether they are so notified,recognized or classified under any Law, and irrespective of the ownership of the land andsuch forests.
(ii)
Identify areas which were early are forests but stand degraded, denuded or
cleared; andPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 163 of 402

(iii)
Identify areas cover by plantation trees belonging to the Governments andthose belonging to private persons.”
Therefore the proposed Addition to Kaziranga National Park as per the directive of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court “are”Forest” irrespective of whether they are so notified
recognized or classified under any Law” which is the instant case is the Wild Life
(Protection) Act, 1972 and in respect of these lands, the preliminary notifications were
issued in 1985, prior to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and these areas
occur as “Proposed” Additions to the Kaziranga National Park in the Forest Records since
1985.
Further, the Hon’ble Superme Court in their order dated, 19.11.2000 in I.A No. 2 in WP No.
337/1995
stated“---pending
furtherordersnode-reservationofForest/sanctuaries/National Parks shall be effected.” The order of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court was further re-iterated on 09.02.2004 in I.A. No. 16. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court also directed that “no non forest activity is permitted in any National Park or
sanctuary even if prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 has beenobtained.
Therefore, in the light of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court it is crystal clear that the
6th Addition to Kaziranga National Park, together with all other Additions to Kaziranga
National Park which have so far not been given effect either due to pending of decisions of
Hon’ble Courts or non handing over of encroachment free and non encumbered land
having all the rights extinguished, are Forests in Government records as duly notified andirrespective of ownership of such land. Further no part of such land, so notified can bediverted without application of Forest Conservations Act, 1980 irrespective of ownership ofLand. Therefore the Land in question are de facto and de jure National Parks of their own
rights and merit as they are notified under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 irrespectiveof the fact that who so ever may hold the ownership rights of any land therein. Further, theHon’ble Supreme Courts directs that no such land can even be diverted under the Forest
Conservation Act, 1980. Therefore, the land in question and all such Land as being
additions to the Kaziranga National Park are National Parks and cannot be diverted.
Further, as per the Hon’ble Court’s order no non-forest activity is permitted in the National
Park meaning the 6th Addition to the Kaziranga National Park together with all such
Additions to the Kaziranga National Park which are pending final notification or handover
to the Forest Department by the Revenue Authorities. Further it may be noted that thenature of activities of the petitioners is grazing and cattle rearing which is a non-forest
activity and hence is not permitted by Law to be performed or practiced the area notified
as 6th Addition to the Kaziranga National Park. Therefore the petitioners do not have any
locus standi and or any claim and rights over any part of Land Constituted as 6 th Addition
to the Kaziranga National Park and all claims and objections of the petitioners and similarly
such situated persons, if any, have been extinguished by due process of Law. Therefore
the Hon’ble Court may reject the claim of the petitioners and allow the State Govt. toproceed with the final notification without further delay.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 164 of 402

3rd and 5th Addition:
Officially, there were 54 affected families in the 3 rd Addition and 84 nos families in 5 thAddition having cultivation land. Originally there were no huts on these plots. As perreconnaissance survey done for the 3rd Addition areas recently, it was found that there are
30 huts on the western portion of the proposed land; and they have built these huts only in2005 or later. Similarly, in the 5th Addition area, there are 32 nos of huts. These huts came
only in 2012 or later. Some huts came up as late us November, 2013. This may be viewed
further in the light of the fact that that the preliminary notifications for these areas were
issued in 1985Therefore, these all fall in the category of encroachments, and must be
evicted.
2nd Addition:
As regards the 2nd Addition areas, its interesting to go through the Collector's Report which
was carried out de-novo as per the orders of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court dt. 22 Nd
November, 2002 in the CR No. 4167 of 1996. The Collector received a total of 158 claims.
After hearing the claims, the conclusions reached by him are quoted below:“The initial claim of a group of claimants was that they are erosion affected people and theland had been allotted to them by way of rehabilitation. They could not, however, show any
paper issued by any Government functionary making such an allotment of land as claimedby them. The matter was further checked from the Circle Officer, Bokakhat Circle whostated that no such allotment was ever made in the given area. Even the pattern ofoccupation of land does not support the claim that this land was ever allotted to theclaimants by way of resettlement. Normally resettlement is done in symmetrical plots of 2
bighas or 5 bighas for each individual family, which are demarcated in a bigger piece ofland. The land held by each family is thus equal and side by side. In the present situation
the area of land occupied varies from person to person and is scattered all over the place.
This clearly indicates that the claim that the land was allotted by way of resettlement is nor
correct.
Out of the 158 cases, the claimants in 116 cases, as listed out in Annexure-I, produced
reciepts of payment of Tauzi Bahira. Some of these receipts were tampered while in allcases only the amount and and the name of the person making the payment was recordedin the receipt. Normally, even in Tauzi Bahira the Mouzadar allots a Touzi number to each
occupant of the land and records the name of the encroachers. The receipts for payment
of Tauzi Bahira normally indicate the Tauzi number and the person on whose behalf themoney has been paid by the person paying the same. This issue is however only ofacademic interest. Touzi bahira is the fine laid down under the Revenue laws for
encroachment and is not an evidence of title over the occupied land. In view of this all 116
claims, wherein the claimants had produced reciepts of payment of Touzi Bahira, havebeen rejected.”
27 claimants did not have any document at all. The Collector rejected their claim. There
were 9 claimants who had been using the agricultural land for other purposes, and none ofthem could produce any title document and their claims were rejected. The Collector foundthat 6 cases were such that the claims were either fictitious, duplicate or the claimants did
not appear. Hence their claims were rejected. The Collector submitted his report on 17 thAugust, 2009 to the Govt. of Assam.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 165 of 402

The land involved in 2nd Addition belonged to villages Sildubi No.1, Sildubi No.2, Kaziranga
Nanke Gaon and Hathikhuli Bagicha Gaon. In Sildubi No. 1 village 1383B-0K-10L land
was VGR/PGR and the same already has been handed over to the DFO, EAWL. There
was also additional 158B-3K-18L land covered by annual patta. Of this 31B-2K-0L land
could not be handed over as the pattadars refused to part with the land. So far 109B-0K0L land has already been handed over to the DFO on 21 st June, 2004. There is additional
31B-3K-16L of land covered under periodic patta, not handed over. In Sildubi No. 2, thereis 1395B-2K-17L of land, which is entirely Govt. land and under encroachment. In the
Kaziranga Nanke Gaon, there is 1388B-3K-18L of land which is entirely Govt. land. Of this58B-3K-18L was found to be under encroachment. The remaining land handed over to the
DFO, EAWL. In the Hatikhuli Bagicha Gaon, the measure of land involved is 92B-2K-9L,
which were under periodic patta. Possession of this land also was handed over to DFO,EAWL on 26th July, 2004.
Deosur Encroachment:
The most controversial and visible encroachment is the Deosur encroachment on the rightside of the NH37 after descending Gajraj View point and Deosur Bridge while coming from
Guwahati side. Apparently, from Deosur Bridge to Palkhowa Gaon, all along the NH37.
After inquiring with the local forest staff and revenue authorities, and examining certain
documents, it appears that this encroachment has a beginning in the acquisition of the 1 st
Addition to the Kaziranga National Park. Land measuring 6870B-2-K-3L under the Dwar
Bagori Mauza was acquired for the 1 st Addition and the possession was taken on the 20 thof October, 1994 by carrying out eviction operations early in the morning. A total of 93
families were evicted, out of which 36 families had settled on Govt. land and the rest werefrom patta land. The names of the villages were kawoimari Kissam and Palikhowa Kissam.
As these people were driven out on the NH37, stay orders for evictions arrived, and theoperation had to be stopped. As a result, the people gathered on the other side of the
NH37 near Deosur, and decided to stay put on the vacant lands there. Finding noalternative, the DC, Nagaon vide WT No. NRE.12/87/(KA) Dt. 4 Th May, 1995 and No.
NRQ(KNP) 1/87/-289 Dt. 12ThJune, 1996 to take necessary steps. Thereafter, the SDO ©,Kaliabor vide order No. 586/95 Dt. 14 Th December, 1995, asked Kaliabor Circle Officer tosubmit a report. A proposal was submitted to settle them under Dwar Bagori and Dwar
salona Mouzas of Kaliabor revenue Circle, allotting 55B-4K-0L land for the purpose. The
proposed land was covered by dag No. 34,35 and 36 of Palikhowa Kissam and Dag No. 817. The SDO(C), Kaliabor passed an order vide Memo No. KRS.168/96/23 Dt. 19 Th June,
1996 allotting the land to the displaced families.
However, a perusal of the forest records reveals a little different set of facts. The area tothe right of the NH37 about 800 meters away from the Deosur Bridge upto the Pilkhowa
Gaon falls very much in the Bagser RF, which was declared in 1919. The boundary
description of North side reads towards the end, “..foot of the hills to the largest tributary of
the Gorakati Juri on the right. Thence a straight demarcated line eastwards to meet Chota
Borjuri southeast of Deosur village. Thence along this Juri to where it meets Borghop Jurinear Assam Trunk Road and thence along the Assam Trunk Road to the mouth of an
unnamed Juri to the west of Palkai Tea Estate, a little beyond 117 th Mile of the Assam
Trunk Road”, and East side, “Up the unnamed Juri to the west of the Palkai Tea Estate toits source, thence southwards along a ridge to the Bura Parbat, thence along thecontinuation of the same ridge...”. As per the Survey of India Topographic sheets of 1914
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 166 of 402

and 1972, the stretch of the Bagser RF is almost 1.80 km between the Deosur Bridge andthe Burapahar Beat (under Western Range, Bagori) all along the NH37 and the whole area
upto the ridge line behind makes the Bagser RF. Therefore, the current settlements, bywhatever means achieved in the past, and irrespective of whatever orders issued by the
Revenue authorities appear to be very much within the Bagser RF declared in 1919.
Hence this calls for eviction. The only issue remains to be examined is the stretch to theright of and between the Deosur Bridge and NH37 till it meets the Bagser RF boundary.
The Chirang Parbat was notified as proposed Deosur Hill Reserved Forest in 1979 vide
Govt. of Assam Notification No. FRS.482/29/3 Dt. 12 Th April, 1979 having an area of 67.5
Ha. The Starting point of the boundary reads, “The reference point stands on the K.M.
Post No. 116/ N.H.37 Gauhati Saikhowa...”. It is to be noted that the Govt. of Assam had
already declared its intention to reserve the Chirang Parbat and the adjoining area
between the Chirang Parbat and the Baser RF as a RF. The KM Post 116 is actually theMile Post that can be found only in the 1914 Survey of India Topographic Sheet 83F2. It isinteresting to note that the Bagser RF boundary lies just little ahead of mile post 116 andgoes beyond the mile post 117 on the NH37. Therefore, between the proposed Deosur Hill
RF and the Bagser RF, there is very little area left. In view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court'sorder already quoted, the area of proposed Deosur Hill RF is very much a forest, notified
prior to the oder of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and hence no part of it can be diverted forany non forestry purposes by any authority. Therefore, the entire settlements mushrooming
since 1996 on the right of NH37 between the Deosur bridge and Palkhowa village areillegal and should be evicted. The entire proposed Deosur Hill RF area should be
remapped and taken as a part of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. The entire area which ismore than 15 sq km, combining parts of Bagser RF and proposed Deosur RF, is a corridor
and must be made free of encroachment for good.
Banderdubi Encroachment:
It is learnt that huge amount of Govt. land were allotted to Social Forestry to raise
plantations around the Kaziranga National Park in 1986. Most of the areas were either not
planted up or abandoned subsequently. Banderdubi is one such area where theplantations failed and slowly encroachers settled thereafter. Initially there were about 5-6
families. Now a whole village has come up. This is an area which is required very much togive the much needed breathing space to the Park/ Tiger Reserve.
11.6

New Corridors

This paragraph is relevant only when we consider the Bager RF as a part of the Kaziranga
Tiger Reserve. As a a thumb rule suggested in Chapter 14, for every 80-100 sq km area
added, a new Range must be added. Therefore, if the Bagser RF has to become a part of
Kaziranga, a new Range must be brought into existence. However, the matter underdiscussion here is the connectivity between Bagser RF and Kukrakata RF. At present,rhinos and elephants move across the NH37 from Amguri, Kathalcham and Rangalu side
into the Bagser RF area through the intervening Amguri TE. In the current strategies, thefield staff patrolling the NH37 keeps on lookout for straying rhinos on the other side ofNH37, and if any such rhinos are located, the staff drives them back. This happens quite
often. Therefore, it is proposed that if the Bagser RF is to be brought under the
management of Kaziranga, there would be a great necessity to maintain several corridors.
After a preliminary survey of the area, it is seen that the rhinos prefer the low lying swampy
formations in between hillocks of the tea garden, and often use the ridge lines for
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 167 of 402

defecation. These hillocks are very low lying and gentle in slope. There are several places
where there is sparse or no population between the tea estate and the Bagser RF on one
side and Kukrakata on the other side. Three corridors can be carved out, one each atAmguri, Kathalcham and Rangalu. However, since it involves highway crossing, there
would be requirement of at least two flyovers, one covering Kathalcham to Amguri, andanother at Rangalu. All the tea garden areas and private land falling within the corridors
must be procured at market rates. If necessary a few habitations may have to be shifted/
relocated.
11.7

Informed Management

Managing the habitat and wildlife effectively would require inputs from several sources of
information such as health of water bodies, status of grasslands, wind directions for rightburning decisions, soil moisture content, extent of pesticides and bacteria in the water
bodies, GIS based inputs on movement of staff, location of camps, roads and bridges,
asset management, history of performance of staff and record of their inputs, locations ofanimal sightings and their movement, just to mention a few. In absence of appropriate
management tools, a large force such as 1200 men of Kaziranga National Park would be
difficult to manage. A manual management system would leave scope for cutting corners
and mistakes.
Therefore, streamlining the administration and logistic support with well informed decisionmaking is the requirement of today. Though Kaziranga has some history of using certain
tools and applications, these are yet to be institutionalized. It is proposed thatmanagement must be modernized in phases to keep in sync with the times and enable thedecision makers to take the right decisions. Details of some of the interventions suggested
is given in some detail in Chapter 12.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 168 of 402

CHAPTER 12
12 UPSCALING ANTI POACHING INFRASTRUCTURE
As already outlined in Chapter 7, the anti poaching infrastructure in Kaziranga
is limited to anti poaching camps, vehicles, motor boats, weaponry andassociated support system. As also described in the same chapter, thepoaching strategies have been constantly changing all throughout. To build
infrastructure targeted at one speciic type of poaching strategy may be short
lived and may prove futile in case the poachers change their strategies. There
have been several changes in poaching strategies such as pit-poaching,electrocution, trap, gun shot with home made riles, gun shot with .303, gun
shot with .303 and silencer, gun shot indiscriminate iring at a very close range
with AK series riles, shooting on moon lit nights, shooting early dusk or dawn,
shooting randomly anytime to mention a few. Time is not far when poachers
would start using snipers and grenades. As regards crossing the river,strategies range from using country boats to using tyre-tubes, loating logs,
swimming, wading in shallow waters, using long pipes to breath under waterand loating downstream along the current. The days when there was no
mobile, poachers had ixed timings for their link-men and boatmen to dropthem and pick them up at designated points. Burying the boats at somestrategic points in the shallow waters, sand and mud is still practiced. However,with coming of mobile, they now are getting picked on demand and situation
based. Poachers in single, till now have not been conirmed in Kaziranga, unlike
in Kruger National Park. There are at least 3 to 4 persons. The actual numbers
could be as high as 6-8. The terrain is such that it may not be possible tonegotiate it single handedly. In has been observed in several encounters thateven when they are inside they operate in small groups. The groups have beenmostly seem to be prepared for at least two to three days stay, as they comewith suicient dry ration and fruits for the entire team.
Though the draft Tiger Conservation Plan of Kaziranga talks of Pre-Entry, Postentry strategies, However, the same may not work even. There was a time
when poachers were scared of gun shots and could run away leaving the hornand everything by hearing gun-shot from the nearest camp. Today these gunshots tell them where all the patrolling teams are located and what could be
the shortest path and safest time gap to scoot from the scene. Earlier
poachers ired at the staf occasionally, but today our staf runs the risk oflosing their life. Today it matters who shoots irst and who has the better ire
power.
12.1

Mission Poaching Free Kaziranga

The author is of the strong opinion that poaching is one such menace which
can be totally controlled, and is the least of the problems that Kaziranga faces
today. If poaching was the only issue plaguing Kaziranga and threatening its
survival, I can say irmly that Kaziranga would survive as long as the earth
exists in its current shape and situation (discounting climate change altogetherhere). However, it is not so. Even if the poaching was arrested fully, Kaziranga
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 169 of 402

would continue to be in danger for reasons already explained in several
chapters starting from Chapter 2 to Chapter 7. Poaching can be controlled andhence, must be controlled at any cost, however high that cost may be.
Why to adopt a Mission Poaching Free Kaziranga? Poaching is not only an illegal
activity, but also a crime against society, nature, environment, forests andwildlife. Its a crime most heinous and barbarous, beyond description of any
words to kill such a magniicent an animal as rhino in cold blood and drive thespecies to extinction. Poaching would become a threat in Kaziranga if thepoaching counts exceed 40 per year for several years at a stretch. One cannot
allow that to happen at all even accidentally. Anti poaching measures need tobe adopted in such a manner that anti poaching operations can be sustainedfor years together without any casualties. To achieve this a Mission approach is
required.
12.1.1

Goals of the Mission

Two goals have been set, namely:1. Protection of the rhinoceros and other wildlife by achieving strategic and tacticalsuperiority
2. Enhance management decision making by scientific inputs from the field
12.1.2

Objectives of the Mission

The key objectives are:1. To secure the front line staff against possible attacks by poachers with sophisticatedarms
2. To arm the front line staff with day and night field surveillance capabilities
3. To equip the front line staff with latest field equipment for scientific inputs
4. To build capacities of the field staff by providing training and management inputs bymaking them SMART GUARDS
5. To have an Informed Management of the Park
12.1.3 Expected Outcomes of the Mission
The expected outcomes are enumerated below:1. Poaching of Rhinos brought down to single digit
2. Least casualties to front line staff
3. Management information on wetlands and habitat
4. Reduce resentment and apprehension among public
12.2

Key Components of the Mission

A series of new initiatives are being organized to achieve the mission “Poaching Free
Kaziranga” by modernizing and upscaling the anti poaching infrastructure. The partpresented here is confined to anti poaching infrastructure alone. However, the overall
strategies for the Park include R&D, habitat improvement, expansion of the Park area,
procurement of land, legislation of new regulations, landscape based management A snapshot of the proposed measures in respect of anti poaching infrastructure alone is being
tabulated here:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 170 of 402

Sl.
No.

Brief Description

Key Features

Possible
Funding
Sources

Part A

SMART GUARD

NVD, Thermal Scanners, GPS,
Range Finder, BP Jacket etc.,
Uniform

CSR/
Foundation

Part B

SMART
COMMUNICATION

Integrated Data, Voice, Video
and Wireless

CSR/
Foundation

Part CELECTRONIC EYE

8 tall towers with Optical and NTCA
Thermal scanners, central
control room. Towers to be
increased to 15 at a later datePart D

Anti Poaching Camps

Adding new camps/ improving/ NTCA, Govt,
CSR
rebuilding existing and old
campsPart E

Staf Welfare

Quality Water, Health Care,
Recreation, training andcapacity building

Part F

Informed Management

AWS, Water & Air Quality, GIS, CSR/
MIS, Satellite Imaging, Terrain Foundation /Govt
mapping, Flood simulation

Part G

Roads, Bridges,
Causeways

Improving existing network ofroads/ bridges, adding new
patrol paths, building longspan columnless bridges,
causeways

Part H

CSR/
R&D in Anti Poaching & Gun Shot Locator, StealthFoundation/
Vehicles, Ambush Plan, Anti
Upgradation ofPoaching Camera Traps, Use of Govt./ NGOs
Technologies
Radar etc.

Part I

Vehicles/ Boats

New vehicles, Boats,
Maintenance, Fuel, Modern
navigation tools, Stealthcapabilities

Govt/ CSR/
NGO

Part J

Perimeter Security

Perimeter Security Cameras,
Perimeter Watch Towers

CSR, Govt./
Foundation

Part K

UAV & Aerial
Surveillance

Aerial monitoring, 24X7
surveillance

NTCA/ Govt/
WWF/ Army

CSR/ Govt/
NGOs/
Foundation/
Society

NTCA/ Govt

A series of new equipment are being proposed. Several technologies such asnight vision devices (BEL models used by the Indian Army), thermal scanners(Flir PS32/ LS 64/ Optix Dali 730), GPS devices (Garmin 78S, Oregon 550), Laser
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 171 of 402

Range Finders, search lights with IR and Fog ilters etc. have been short-listed
for upscaling the anti poaching infrastructure.
12.2.1 Introducing SMART GUARD:
SMART GUARD, in the context of prevailing situation in the Kaziranga National
Park stands for:S
Sustain Stamina 24X7X365
M
MotivatedA
Action oriented
R
Ready to Act
T
Trained and Tactically Superior
G
U
A
R
D

Get down to the poachers
Undeterred by Adverse Conditions
Always Armed (Weapon, Equipment & Kits)
Right Thinking at Right Time
Develop Yourself

A SMART GUARD is:
1. Well Equipped
2. Well Trained
3. Well motivated
The proposal is to create an elite force of about 50-75 SMART GUARDs to begin
with. Though there is a large number of equipment (in the thought process),
initially it is proposed to start with day vision binoculars, spotoscopes, hand
held GPS sets, range inders, night vision goggles/ binoculars, hand held
thermal scanners, powerful search lights including illumination systems with IR
capabilities, bullet proof jackets and helmets. To this is added portable battery
packs (as the equipment would need power supplies during long hours ofambush and patrolling). The focus is also on design of a smart uniform with twocomplete sets of shirt, pants, shoes, belt, cap, decorations and some electronic
IR implants to distinguish between foe and friends, especially at night andduring ambush.
Introduction of SMART GUARD system would change the patrolling, ambush andsurveillance strategies, which would require training and motivation of the front line
staff. Therefore, 6 months intensive training have been proposed to make the field
staff adopt to the new technologies and systems for better performance.
The WWF-India has already supplied four numbers of Flir PS32 Hand Held Thermal
Scanners to the Forest Department, Assam. Of these two scanners have been handed overto Kaziranga by the PCCF(Wildlife) and the Chief Wildlife Warden. The Kaziranga
authorities have lined up procurement of a large number of such equipment. A proposal has
already been submitted to ONGC CSR for funding of the Smart Guard Pilot Project inKaziranga. On fructification, this would be fist major modernization attempt in a big way in
the Park/Tiger Reserve. The original value of the proposal submitted was Rs. 14.63 crores.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 172 of 402

This is being revised (upwards) in view of the certain new requirements and pricediscoveries. The revised proposal would soon be submitted to ONGC for consideration.
12.2.2 Smart Communication
SMART COMMUNICATION, like the SMART GUARD a also a SMART strategy without
which an effective anti poaching strategy cannot work. The acronym given below for
COMMUNICATION would make sense only if you see through the requirements of a very
good communication system. The acronym has been carefully thought to bring home thepoints of strategic importance that the park must have today. The acronym runs as below:
S
M
A
R
T

Swift
Meaningful
Always On
Reach All
Trouble Free

C
O
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N

Capable of telling your immediate X,YOperating 24X7
Master has the irst right to talkMust obey or get killed
Uniformly distributed all over
Never allow any unauthorized entry (Kill the unwanted)
Include a surprise
Catch the culprit
Always Available
Tell who talked where (and what?)
Indicate What's going on
Overpower others
No to Mobiles when inside Kaziranga boundary

The proposed network is a digital wireless interfaced with data and video
capabilities. A new frequency is proposed to be obtained for its operation. It
would be run through a network/ mesh of 8 40-45 m towers (of the ElectronicEye), 10-15 towers of 30 meter height, 50 towers of 10 m height, towers/ masts
over anti poaching camps, wireless access points, display devices (hand-heldand ixed panels), a modern control room and distributed control systems ineach of the ranges and beats. Such a network would enable transmission oflive images from stealth camera/ trap cameras and other surveillance devices
and sensors to the nearest camps/ control rooms. It is proposed to develop an
integrated Intranet of Kaziranga National Park/ Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. In themedium term, it is proposed to equip every single staf with the new digital set.
It is also proposed that all the camps where the new technology would be
introduced, carrying of mobile sets would be totally prohibited. All such stafshall have to leave their mobile in lockers that would be provided in the Range
oices. One locker for every individual in the long run, but to begin with one
locker for every such camp. A new protocol for the use of the new technology
would be developed and all the staf would be trained in that.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 173 of 402

As the new sets would start getting replaced, the old sets would be deployed in
the fringe areas/ corridor areas and other areas of the KTR. However, in thelong run, another channel would be procured for the rest of the KTR.
A demonstration of such a network has already been done in the month ofMarch, 2014. In the pilot phase about 70 new digital handsets are being
proposed with one repeater. A complete proposal on network upgradation
costing about Rs. 15.00 crore is being prepared for submission to Oil India Ltd
for CSR funding.
12.2.3 Electronic Eye
Electronic Eye is a novel initiative of the NTCA, Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt.
of India, New Delhi, which was first developed and deployed in Corbett National Park.
Soon afterwards the scheme was decided to be implemented in Kaziranga National Park
for anti poaching activities at the request of the Govt. of Assam. The initial phase of the
project was sanctioned during 2013-14 by the NTCA for an amount of Rs. 3.00 crore. The
work was initiated towards the end of the last financial year. The project in its current
phase consists of 9 nos of 45 m tall towers (one of which shall be the control tower), each
mounted with a very high resolution optical and thermal camera. The resolution of the
optical camera is such that about 6-8 km radius around the tower would be visible in day
light, while at least 3 km visibility would be available using thermal cameras at night. The
images would be beamed to the control panels located at the Central Control Room (being
developed at Kohora). Arrangements are being made also to enable viewing at therespective ranges and the beat camps where the strike forces would be made available.
The camera systems would be interconnected through wiMax connectivity. The electronic
eye towers would also double up for hosting wireless and wi-fi infrastructure within thePark.
The nine sites selected are Kohora (for the central tower), Kukrakata Hill top most point,
Tunikati river point (in Western Range), Off Bahubil APC Point (in Western Range) to act
as relay tower to overcome the shadow effect of the Burapahar hill range, Sitalmari (inWestern Range), Arimora (in Central Range), Tinisuti (on the border of Central ad Eastern
Range), Mahkhuti (Eastern Range) and Tamulipathar (Eastern Range). The execution of
the works has already started. The tower at Kohora is already erected. The foundation
works for Mohkhuti, Tamulipathar and Arimora also completed and the tower erection isunderway. Further works have stopped due to flooding in the channels and transportationof materials and man is now difficult. Three cameras have already arrived. It is expectedthat by end August, 2014 the electronic eye cameras (3 nos) will start functioning.
12.2.4 R&D Efforts in Anti-poaching and SurveillanceWithin a short period several R&D initiatives have already been started towards achieving
effective anti poaching advantages over the poachers. One of the key initiatives has been
to start a collaboration with the Electronics and Electrical Department of the IIT Guwahati
in association with Dr. Anup Gogoi to develop low cost sound sensors, sound amplificationand gun shot locators. Dr. Gogoi has made considerable headway already and it isexpected that within a month or so, trial for some of the gadgets would be started in thePark.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 174 of 402

Another key initiative has been to modify camera trap systems to achieve surveillance
during night. It has been observed that while camera traps with white flash are deployed
for tiger census operations, they are subject to damage by poachers as they flash at night.
As a result considerable information about poachers and illegal entrants in the Park has
been lost already. Further, the current camera trap models do not have communication
system and one needs to collect data physically over regular intervals. Thus, currency of
information and its relevance is lost for anti poaching strategies. A new set of cameras withdual flash system (black flash and also white flash) have been obtained for trial purposes.
The issue is that photographs blur at night in low IR flash, and a slight reddish glow also
emerges. These issues are being addressed. Additionally trials to convert these camerasby coupling with wi-fi devices, solar charging, IR flood lights etc are being experimented. It
is expected that shortly working assemblies could be deployed in the Park. If successful,bulk deployment would be resorted to. These experiments were also shared with thevisiting South African Expert team to Kaziranga comprising of Dr. Rodrick B Potter, Chief
Wildlife Investigation Officer, South Africa and Dr. Cindy Harper of Pretoria University. The
visiting team expressed their satisfaction at the R&D efforts and also offered somevaluable suggestions. Another area of R&D has been to develop ambush gadgets for night
patrol. Though considerable success has been achieved using Night Vision Device (NVD)
coupled with IR torches,, there are issues to be sorted out to reduce the red glow of the IR
beam which is discernible from a distance. A solution on this front is also expected within amonth or two.
12.2.5 Stealth Vehicles and Boats
It is often necessary to move manpower and equipment in interior areas to reinforce strikeefforts when some infiltration/ trespass has occurred. In such situations, movement of staff
is closely monitored by the poachers, and they are easily able to escape following thebright lights emanating from search lights and head-lights of the vehicles. In such asituation, use of any visible spectrum light becomes totally unwarranted. There fore, there
is a requirement to develop vehicles and speed boats with high stealth capabilities using
heavy silencers, IR lights etc.
12.2.6 Perimeter Security and Virtual Fencing
There is a three pronged strategy proposed for perimeter security of the Kaziranga
National Park, and later on the same can be adopted for the entire Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve (KTR) and other rhino bearing areas.
Firstly, the most vulnerable (often the entire perimeter, if possible) line segments need tobe identified and within 800m to 1.5 km radius, a surveillance tower atleast 25-30 ft highneeds to be erected. The surveillance tower should be having atleast 6x6 sq ft space/platform to watch. One such tower using locally available materials such as timber posts,
bamboo etc. has been built on the river bank side between Debeswari and NaobhangiCamps. These posts are for 24x7 surveillance and meant to be used as sentry posts.
Atleast one or two guards need to man these posts on an 8-hourly basis. Each such post
shall be equipped with high quality binoculars/ spotoscope/ hand-held thermal scanner/solar chargers/ wireless communication systems. The surveillance tower should be solocated as to provide clear 3600 view of the surrounding area. Any suspicious movement
should be intimated to the nearest anti poaching camp for immediate strike and ambush.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 175 of 402

However, looking at the terrain and vegetation of Kaziranga, its is clear that this strategy
would work best in post burning scenarios and in short grass areas only. Especially when
there are woodlands, highlands and tall grass areas, the visibility window of visual andthermal radiations would get narrow. To overcome this, a mix of strategies is suggested as
below:• IR Camera Traps and IR flood lights in low sensitive areas• Array of thermal/visual camera with atleast one preset line crossing
which would generate alarm in the nearest watch-tower and anti
poaching camps• IR/Laser fence• Motion Detection Sensors
However, the most sensitive areas, such as certain parts of Burapahar and Western
Range along the NH37, southern boundary in the Eastern Range from Dhanbari to
Japaripathar, Laodubi area in the Central Range where man-movement is very high andthe concentration of villages on the fringe of the Park boundary is maximum, it is proposed
to deploy a high level of perimeter security based on ultra high quality optical/thermal
cameras in dual mode with provisions of at least three preset lines of defence. One such
system on trial basis consisting of a set of 10 Bosch MI612 cameras/ Motorolla canopy
Wireless systems is proposed to cover a perimeter of atleast 8-12 km stretch in the
Burapahar Range starting from Ghorakati upto Baneswar. The estimated cost is about Rs.
4.00 crores. The proposal is being submitted under CSR/ CAMPA.
GSR:
Ground Surveillance Radars are unique products that provide intruder detection
capabilities under the most difficult terrain and weather conditions. These are field provenand have been used in a variety of protection models. These radars can operate in varying
ranges, over land and water rapidly searching for intruders as small as a crawling person,
ensuring that intruders/movements are detected, identified and intercepted before theyreach critical areas.
It is proposed that over next 3 to 6 months, some of these technologies would be
introduced, tested and then after extensive field trials involving the local field staff in day to
day operations would be inducted in the Park for full scale deployment. A right mix oftechnologies based on local conditions, terrain, suitable power availability, possible
integration with other systems need to be adopted. Straight copying and pasting oftechnologies either from Internet domain, or other places may not work in the manner
desired for anti poaching works in Kaziranga. The man behind the machine, the field staff,
their level of education, desire to adopt and right kind of incentives for adopting to newer
technologies need to be given highest priority. What has worked in one place, may noteven make an impact in Kaziranga, as field conditions would considerably differ. This
statement would apply, in general, for all the technologies mentioned in this report. Trial onsome of the technologies have already started.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 176 of 402

12.2.7 UAV and Air Surveillance
Though the first trail UAV trial flight in India was made in Kaziranga on the 4-5 th April, 2013,
the entire matter came to a screeching halt due to orders by the Ministry of Defence. Aerial
Vehicles (both manned an un-manned) have been used in the Western countries forsurveillance, population monitoring and crisis management. In India, manned aerial
vehicles have been used occasionally for animal count (e.g. wild ass population
estimation) and forest mapping (e.g. forest survey). In order to offer effective solutions tovarious problems encountered by the Forest Officials and Researchers, Wildlife Institute ofIndia and National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), in collaboration with World Wide
Fund-International (WWF), Conservation Drones, Indian Institute of Information
Technology, Allahabad (IIITA), Ohio State University, USA (OSU) and State Forest
Department have taken up R&D projects to integrate advance technologies such as use ofDrone or Un-Manned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) and Sensor Communication Networks (SCN).
These tools and techniques are currently being experimented in Panna Tiger Reserve,
Madhya Pradesh. Due to issues of permissions from the MoD, the project could not belaunched in Kaziranga.
This technology is becoming powerful across the world in military and civilian purposes, tothe extent that even commercial firms are looking at this option to deliver goods. Recently,
there was a test run of a local Mumbai based firm who delivered a pizza using aquadcopter. The Un-manned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) or Drone are small to medium sizedaircrafts, supported by programmable auto-pilot and telemetry systems, capable of on
board recording and live transmission of information. UAV is expected to be involved insurveillance in strategic places and remote areas, night patrolling using thermal cameras,
radio-tracking of animals and habitat monitoring. In April 2013, test flight of a small aircraft
known as 'Maja' was undertaken in Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, but subsequent training andintegration could not be done due to refusal of permission from the Ministry of Defence(MoD). However, MoD has given permission for Panna Tiger Reserve until June 2014, but
it is expected to be extended for further years, as there is support from MoD forconservation and research activities. Advanced models of UAV known as 'Caipy' and'Vanguard' with better aerodynamics and stability are being field tested in Panna Tiger
Reserve, with the permission of MoD.
Technically, Caipy has Wingspan of 850mm, Weight of 650g, Flight time of 30mins, Cruise
Speed of 45-50kph and can optimally fly about 20km, powered by rechargeable battery.
Where as Vanguard has Wingspan of 1400mm, Weight of 2000g, Flight time of 60mins,
Cruise Speed of 45-80kph and can optimally fly for 40km, powered by rechargeable
battery. These UVAs carry GoPro video camera and other form of data collection units
could be integrated. The flight paths could be programmed by marking way points and canalso be controlled manually through telemetry modem. Currently, video system is used andin few months time, thermal and mapping cameras would also be used. Usefulness further
enhanced by manual launching in the field even in remote places, and powered byrechargeable batteries that could be charged even with car batteries. Other model of UAV
that are also effective for short-distance but long duration hovering is ‘Quadcopters or
Hexacopters’ which can carry more payloads and can be effective in documenting eventsfrom a static point with high quality information. Tentative cost of the each unit of UAV isRs. 6-8 lakhs, including transportation and taxes, and will likely be less or more dependingon the kind of onboard units required.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 177 of 402

Sensor Communication Networks:
This aims to use sensor and communication networks for setting up virtual fences as wellas identifying and monitoring selected regions of the forest where the inhabitants of theforest or the environment are threatened. Several sensing modalities are being exploredsuch as Pulse-Doppler Radar (PDR), Passive Infra-Red (PIR), Acoustic and Buried cable.
These sensors and communication networks could cover sensitive region or the wholearea of the reserve. Each sensors placed at 1km apart is capable of receiving signals of
any intrusion or animal activities and transmitting the information to base station that could
be either at beat level, range level or at the head quarters. Currently, experiments arebeing carried out with encouraging results for detecting human intrusion or animal
venturing out of the forest boundary, tiger monitoring on trial including noise detection for
digging and wood cutting, and detecting road crossing of animals. There are sensors thatcan detect sound including gunshots and could be transmitted to base station which canbe Range Office and to Head Quarters if connected with GSM network. This technology
has multiple functions from day-to-day monitoring of activities and for quick response todeal with offences.

In

the context of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, integration of these model tools and also
involvement of aerial equipments including helicopters may be important, in the line ofconservation activities being carried out in western countries. It is possible to integrate
such tools since the expertise are already being established by Wildlife Institute of India
and National Tiger Conservation Authority, and that this can be one of the key priority
activities in the coming years to combat the poaching menace. It is also pertinent tomention that these tools are specially useful if deployed in a targeted fashion to thespecific activities, rather than military outlook to the management activities, since there is aneed to be inclusive in conservation actions. Involvement of or collaboration with security
forces would also be helpful, and also other relevant agencies (e.g. WWF-International)
that are involved conservation activities involving technologies. Given the emerging issues
and the developing expertises with increasing interest level, technological solution topoaching issues, at least at the level of survillence and documentation for legal support is
likely to become mainstay in the years to come. If handled effectively with specific
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 178 of 402

expertise, it can become useful tool in the overall management of species populations andconservation.
Quad-Copters
QuadCopter is a heavy lift multirotor, powerful, redundant and versatile solution for aerial
Surveillance of the forest areas with autonomous flight capability powered by batteries.
QuadCopter comes with most advanced autopilot system combined with a precise GPS
navigation, built-in advanced processor and sensor technology real-time operating system,
The Autopilot delivers incredible performance, flexibility, and reliability for autonomous
flight. With a plug-and-play gimbal compatibility, its swept back front arms and stability inhigh winds, which is an ideal aerial platform for capturing stable, jello-free imagery in theforest under harsh weather conditions. A robust and easy-to-fly copter with flexible payload
options can take off and land anywhere. The QuadCopter is fully configured for portable,
and can be readily launched anywhere.

The QuadCopter features:•••

A full range of autonomous flight modes, including waypoint navigation, loiter, circle,
and return to launch
Mission-planning software enables virtually unlimited waypoints for reliable,
repeatable missions, and flight data analysis
Geofencing and robust failsafes ensure the safest operation

System Components Of Quadcopter:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Autopilot System
Power ModuleGPS
FirmwareRadio Controller-Telemetry
Battery pack, battery charger and battery bag
Average flight time: 1-3 hrs
Payload : Day & Night Camera ( FLIR )Command & Control Unit.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 179 of 402

Payload On The QuadCopter:
The camera, which is of FLIR make is a rugged military grade all weather PTZ system
ideal for Quad Copters, applications. The multi sensor pan tilt camera system is provided
in an ultra compact rugged housing. It is an weather remote positioning system suitable
for mounting on a wide range of aerial platforms. Included and integrated within thegimbal turret is a sensitive Daytime Color / Low light camera which offers good resolution
with TELEPHOTO ZOOM for extended range and with very good Day/Night imaging
capabilities that compliments the included FLIR thermal imager camera sensor. Black andwhite thermal imaging is the industry standard for surveillance imaging systems. The
grayscale imaging palette provided with all systems produces crisp accurate imaging
profiles of the scene viewed. This advance thermal imaging system offers B/W and color
performance.

Command & Control Unit of QuadCopter:
A command and control unit comprises of a vehicle mount receiver for data from thecamera along with controls to view zoom, pan tilt etc with a Display as shown below apartfrom the QuadCopter unit. It is advisable to operate the QuadCopters in pairs (two persite) as they can be programmed for a continued surveillance. In an autonomous mode
they can be programmed to take position in time when the endurance lapses. It is
proposed that two pairs of Quad-Copters may be procured with thermal and opticalscanner payloads. The advantage of Quad-Copters is that they can hover over the area ofinterest. This would aid tremendously in locating run away poachers as well as stray rhino
search operations in the chapori areas.
Aerostat
Aerostat has already been demonstrated in India during the opening ceremony of theCommonwealth Games, 2010 at new Delhi. This is a device which can keep itself afloat in
the air and can carry payloads for aerial observations. Also known as Observation
Balloons, these are mobile tactical surveillance systems, consisting of a stabilized
day/night electro-optical payload suspended from a helium-filled aerostat that is tethered toa ground control system. By providing an elevated platform, well above the ground/field ofoperations, the system offers an indispensable, dominating view of the scene below,
prolonged, medium-range surveillance coverage. These systems are field proven, easily
deployed and serve both for surveillance and deterrence. Since they are visible from a
distance, their deterrence effect is tremendous.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 180 of 402

Vehicle Mounted Mobile Surveillance
These are mobile watch towers about 25-30 ft high with a observation post at the top,which can be mounted on a vehicle such as 4W drive Maruti Gyspsy or Scorpio. The tower
would be collapsible, and can be erected manually/ hydraulically wherever required.
Observation vehicles are compact systems that dramatically increases the surveillanceand protection capabilities of a mobile operational unit. These systems consist of astabilized day/night payload lifted by a telescopic mast and can be installed on suitablevehicles as required to enable a vital "look-up and see" capability to wide area of security
operations. These systems include a simple, smart operator interface with digital map
display, recording, GPS targeting etc, and may feature a real-time data linkcommunication. These also could be used for manual scanning and look up, while themast provides extra height for electronic surveillance of the area.
12.2.8 Informed Management Systems
Currently, there are few management inputs an data collection system operational inKaziranga. It is no denying that some work has been done in camera trapping of tigers
under the aegis of the NTCA, Govt. of India, with active support of WII and Aaranyak.
However, the Tiger Reserve does not have camera traps of its own. Only during 2013-14,
under NTCA funding about 50 camera traps were procured which are being deployed inwhite/black flash mode depending upon the requirement. The overall strategy is to have
two distinct sets of camera traps, one for tiger census and animal behaviour recording, andthe other with black flash and communication and sister accessories for surveillance
purposes. In course of time, the entire Kaziranga Tiger Reserve shall be covered undercamera traps of both the types.
AWS & Water Quality Monitoring
Similarly, there is no systematic collection of weather data from different parts of the Parkor the Tiger Reserve Currently, there is only one AWS installed in the Central range, which
is not very suitable for data gathering and transmission. However, for better management
and creating microclimatic data, an array of AWS is required all across the Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve, which is currently lacking. An array of AWS has been proposed in the Park forthe time being for continuous collection of weather data. Similarly currently there is no
systematic monitoring of the health of the water bodies. The water bodies are the life lineof the Kaziranga National Park. We require constant monitoring of water quality andpollution levels. These bodies are fed from upstream waters which come throughagricultural fields/ tea gardens which use pesticides/ drugs for pest control. Therefore, it
has been proposed to acquire equipment for monitoring of the water bodies on a regularbasis.
GIS
There is currently no established GIS lab in the Kaziranga National Park. There are a few
GPS sets, but there is no systematic effort to collect GPS based ground points as aregular management practice. All the field staff serving in the Kaziranga Tiger Reserveneed to be provided with GPS sets. Further, most of the GIS work is outsourced, andhence, there is time lag in any meaningful decision making. It is proposed to set up a GIS
lab with work stations, and manpower. The proposed software is GARIIASI developed by
AMTRON (the Govt. of Assam State Nodal IT Agency) based on Free and Open Source
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 181 of 402

Software (FOSS). The software would be customized locally to meet the Park/ Tiger
Reserve requirements. It is proposed to develop customized terrain mapping, flood
simulation, and Kaziranga specific modules, such as Poaching Pattern Analyis, link tocriminal database, infrastructure and force deployment etc. to be developed over
GARIIASI for quick decision making. It is expected that the proposed GIS lab initiative
would enable smart decision making.
Information Technology and Big Data
The current Information Technology set up of Kaziranga is not only rudimentary, but also
can be termed as totally lacking without any plans and perspective. The efforts are
personalized, person centric and confined to spreadsheet, shp files and Google maps. Till
few months ago, Kaziranga even did not have its own portal or website. A portal namely
http://kaziranga.assam.gov.in was set up in mid march to provide information andcollaborate and share inputs. The site is likely to become vibrant in course of time. It ishosted on the AMTRON's Mini Data Center (MDC) on the server and connectivity provided
at the MDC, courtesy AMTRON. The Portal is based on Wordpress framework and has
inbuilt mySQL database. In course of time the system would be strengthened, and the sitewould move to the State Data Center (SDC), as and when the same is ready.
It is proposed to have a state of the art IT system deployed at Kaziranga with distributed
nodes at each of the 5 ranges of the Kaziranga National Park, areas of the Kaziranga
Tiger Reserve such as Laokhowa-Burachapori (and in future Orang National Park, which
may become an integral part of the Kaziranga Tiger reserve or the Kaziranga LandscapeAuthority, whichever is earlier). The plan is to create a hub at Kohora/ Bokakhat with 5edges within Kaziranga National Park, one each edge at Nagaon Wildlife Division andOrang with a network of towers, wiMAx, Wi-fi, wireless radio systems and an Intranet. A
mini data center is also proposed at Kohora/ Bokakhat to support the entire initiative.
Subsequently, the system would get linked up with the Assam SWAN and the PCCF
(Wildlife Office). The portal is being developed with applications for online bookings,
payment gateways, SMS alerts, MIS applications, document management system,
electronic filing and decision making. A video-conferencing application over the Intranet in
the Tiger Reserve is proposed.
One of the most important things to keep in mind, while designing such a system is thatthe array of sensors, camera traps, electronic eye, surveillance cameras, AWS, GPS setsetc. would generate huge amount of data in minutes and seconds. A robust system of data
storage, archiving, retrieval, crunching, analysis and information generation is required to
put in place. Therefore, big data crunching based on Hadoop Clusters is also proposed asa part of the strategy.
The system would collapse, if qualified manpower, consultants, PMU and project teams
are not in place. A dedicated team also would be required to look after GIS, MIS. In
addition another dedicated team would be required to handle electronics andcommunication. With a projected core strength of about 1500 field staff which would
ultimately constitute the fighting force, would require a lot of ground support staff to workout the infrastructure upkeep, logistics and asset management.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 182 of 402

12.3

Solar PowerThe anti poaching camps inside the Park/ tiger Reserve have to depend only on solar.
However, the solar systems are in disarray. Several camps complain of lack of power. A
fresh investment is required in the solar sector. It is possible the the Ministry of Natural andRenewable Energy, Govt. of India may be requested to consider 100% to well equip eachof the camps and other establishment with solar power. On the other hand, higher subsidy
could be allowed to use solar street lights, solar water heaters, solar lanterns etc. for use
in the Forest and Tourism complexes around Kaziranga, the fringe village populations andthe family members of the field staff. Possibilities of setting up solar power plants could be
explored on elevated platforms.
12.4

Tazer Gun and Other Technologies

It is seen that often the forest staff accidentally come face to face with wild animals suchas tigers, rhinos, elephants, buffaloes, bear, wild boar etc. The encounter may result ininjury or death of the staff. Though the guard is armed, more than often he would not shootdirectly at the animal even to save himself. Such being the situation, casualties are very
high in Kaziranga. A list of the dead and injured staff is provided in the Part III of theReport. Nowadays technologies such as Tazer guns are available with deliver a very highvoltage to the animal, but no harm comes to the animal. This gives enough time for thestaff to either leave the spot or secure himself in a better way. Similarly there aretechnologies available which can pin point location of a human being within a range of 500
m. Such technologies are required while searching for poachers in the Park who takeadvantage of the terrain and hide from the staff. There are other such technologies withvery specific application. However, these are all proprietary and patented technologies.
Being proprietary, these technologies are very costly. There may not be an alternativetechnology available in the near future, making the purchasing decision difficult. It issuggested that such equipment and technologies first may be purchased in small
quantities for proof of concept and trials. If proved effective, bulk procurement should be
carried out to empower the staff and secure the Park from poachers and miscreants.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 183 of 402

CHAPTER 13
13 The Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority
As already explained in detail in Chapter 2 and Chapter 6 that there has been several
recommendations in the past, especially from the Kaziranga Biodiversity Conservation andDevelopment Committee and the Local Advisory Committee, both making very specificrecommendations which indicate that an overarching authority is the requirement of theday, if Kaziranga and its surrounding areas have to be conserved and protected on a longterm basis. Though the idea of a Landscape Authority got seeded in the mind of the author
independently looking at the complexities that need to be addressed, and accordingly, thefirst presentation that was made ready for the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court on the 21 st ofMarch, 2014 carried the basics of the new entity. However, the author draws tremendous
satisfaction in discovering at a later date, while digging out data for this Report, that theauthorities in the past have given a thought and came up with almost similar solution. The
only difference between the earlier approached and the current approach is the manner inwhich land surrounding Kaziranga is treated. The core of the new idea floated is summed
up in bullets below:
1. Individuals do need to sell land often under different compelling
circumstances beyond their control
2. Vested interest and land sharks take advantage of such situations andexploit local populations into selling their land
3. The current land acquisition process is very lengthy and not beneficial topeople, as they need instant cash to sort out their problems at hand
4. If land is given for sake of Kaziranga, it is most welcome; and if necessary,such people may also be given premium over and above the market pricefixed by the Deputy Commissioner
5. The Landscape Authority should be empowered to buy land from public atmarket rates within the landscape boundary, even if the parcels are smalland scattered
6. Once sufficient land is clustered together, it could be used to extend the areaof Kaziranga, or resettle people as model villages, or create infrastructure forthe people in the landscape.
7. One could very much look at buying the fringe tea gardens to extend thearea of Kaziranga, retrofit corridors, or to provide alternate livelihoods or
people based management systems of the balance of the tea gardens,
where labourers are partners and stakeholders in profit.
However, some of the commonalities between the current proposed model and the earlier
thought processes are:
1. Zonation of land use around Kaziranga is a must
2. Land-use change must be totally banned
3. Agriculture to non agriculture change of land use must be discouraged totally
4. Mushrooming of dhabas and hotels needs immediately to be halted, if
necessary, by a special order of the Government
5. All encroachment from Government land, forest land, however, old it may be,
must be evicted
6. Tourism activities must be well planned and allowed within tourist zones only
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 184 of 402

7. Local employment must be encouraged
8. No to chemical pesticides/ insecticides in all nearby tea gardens
Some of the new ideas that are being brought into the landscape concept are:
1. Green development zone
2. Green infrastructure
3. Green / Organic agriculture
4. Quality Health care, Education & Insurance
5. Development of model villages
6. Sharing of income of the authority with the fringe population
7. Alternate livelihoods and empowerment of the people
8. Green opportunities
9. Low carbon economy, transport & power
Several names have also been suggested for such an authority in the past, notable among
them being firstly to convert the Kaziranga Biodiversity Conservation and Development
Committee into a permanent body, secondly to constitute a development authority. The
KBCDC also recommended promulgation of legislation namely “Assam Land Use
Regulation Act for Greater Kaziranga”.
Therefore, it is no denying that considerable time has been spent in the past by theconcerned stakeholders to look at various pros and cons and accordingly suggest suitablemeasures to bring a legislation and constitute a development authority to control areas
outside the Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve.
Precedence:
If one looks back, one would find that once Chilika lake was also plagued with various
issues, land grab, conservation vs development debate; and finally the Chilika
Development Authority was constituted in 1991 by the Forest & Environment Department,
Govt. of Orissa, with the Chief Minister, Orissa as Chairman, Minister, Forest &Environment as Working Chairman, and the Principal Secretary, Forest & Environment
Department, Govt. of Orissa as the Chairman of the Executive Committee. The members
include principal Secretaries of the stakeholding departments, including Finance
Department as members, collectors of the adjoining districts, MLAs of the concerned
constituencies as members.
Looking at the complexity of management and several integration issues, the Governmentof Assam constituted the Majuli Cultural Landscape Management Authority in 2006 byenacting the Majuli Cultural Landscape Region Act, 2006, with the Chief Secretary as
Chairperson and the Commissioner, Upper Assam Division, Jorhat as the CEO.
13.1

Naming the Authority

The name proposed for the new authority for Kaziranga landscape is Kaziranga
Landscape Conservation and Development Authority (KLCDA). While Kaziranga is a nameattached with the sentiment of the people of Assam, and a word recognized across the
Globe as the above of the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros. Adding any other name with it
would dilute the issue at hand and give it a very narrow geographic color which is notreally desired. Kaziranga is a stand alone word with a complete meaning, history andPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 185 of 402

significance of its own. The word “Landscape” next to Kaziranga denotes something bigger
than Kaziranga National Park, or even Kaziranga Tiger Reserve (which is bigger than the
Kaziranga National Park in the first place). The word landscape enhances the vastness of
Kaziranga without any specific geographic connotation. In scientific literature, Kaziranga
landscape is a common phrase. The word “Conservation” denotes the basic objective ofconserving and protecting wildlife (especially the rhinoceros in the context of Kaziranga)
which is well understood by all. The word development has been added to focus on thechallenges that Kaziranga is facing now and, if not addressed, which may become its
nemesis in near future. The words conservation and development together signify the ongoing debate on conservation vs development/. However, Kaziranga can become world's
best model is showcasing low carbon development, green opportunities for the population
inhabiting on its fringe, and giving enough space for the wildlife to thrive and prosper for alltimes to come. Therefore, it is thought appropriate to suggest the name of the Authority as
Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority (KLCDA).
13.2

Landscape Approach

Kaziranga landscape is a vast area consisting of the Kaziranga National Park and Tiger
Reserve in their current forms, the watershed of Kaziranga, mostly falling southward in Karbi
Anglong, the Brahmaputra river from Majuli to Orang National Park and the areas
surrounding these geographic entities. Some of these are described briefly in the ensuingparagraphs:13.2.1 Watershed of Kaziranga
Watershed Description:
As the Dhansiri river makes the eastern boundary of the Kaziranga National Park, the entire
Naga Hills watershed draining into Dhansiri, and parts of Karbi Anglong Hills draining into
Dhansiri along with the entire ridge line of Karbi Anglong Hills on the south of Kaziranga upto
the westernmost end of Bagser RF form the watershed of Kaziranga. Further since, theentire Karbi Anglong Hills form the landscape complex with Kaziranga through which longranging animals such as elephants are known to pass, there has been conscious demand
from wildlifers and NGOs in the stakeholder meetings to take the entire forested tracks ofthese hills within the fold of active wildlife and corridor management. However, practically it
is not possible. Therefore, it is proposed that the delineated watershed of Kaziranga, of
which a map has been specially furnished from the Survey of India topographic sheets, inthis Report, and of which a brief description has also been provided hereunder, excluding
Dhansiri part, be considered as the most critical Level I (L1) watershed of Kaziranga, whichmust be protected at any cost, whatever that cost may be. Other areas accordingly should
be managed as Level 2 and Level 3, depending upon the distance from Kaziranga and %area that drains into Kaziranga or its nearby areas.
Area Description:
The Level 1 watershed of Kaziranga as delineated from the Survey of India topographic
sheets on the southern bank of the Brahmaputra river falls in three districts namely Karbi
Anglong, Golaghat and Nagaon districts. The main rivers in this watershed are Deopani and
Difaloo. As already discussed, if Dhansiri is taken into account, the watershed area would
become much bigger, while the landscape programme may lose its focus. The L1 watershed
has been delineated based on the Kukrakata Hill and Bagser RF on the west of the
Kaziranga National Park. The boundary then runs along the ridge line of Bagser Hill and
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 186 of 402

thence to the ridge line of Ruthe Pahar, and then encompassing the watershed of Deopani
river and thereafter further east, the watershed of Difaloo river. The watershed line is thenartificially closed at the south-east point of the boundary of the Kaziranga National Park.
Since the watershed is being shown as an appendage to Kaziranga, the boundary of thewatershed on the north is taken to be the southern boundary of the Kaziranga National Park,
thence the southern boundary of the 1st Addition, and from thence to the point where it
meets the Kukrakata RF.
The area described above, excluding Kukrata RF and Panbari RF, comes to 74935.12 Ha(748.51 sq km). Out of this, an area of 51166.58 ha falls in the Karbi Anglong District,
12969.52 Ha falls in Golaghat District and 10799.02 Ha falls in Nagaon District. The above
facts are summarized in the Table below:Sl. No.

District

Area (Sq Km)% Area1

Karbi Anglong

511.6658

68.28

2

Golaghat

129.6952

17.31

3

Nagaon107.9902

14.41

TOTAL

749.3512

100

Therefore, it is seen that of the total area delineated, 68.28% area falls in Karbi Anglong.
Watershed Characteristics:
All the streams in the watershed were digitised; and streams were assigned stream orders
starting from 1. It was observed that the delineated watershed of Kaziranga has streams
upto 6 order. The stream orders were assigned to each of streams starting from to 6. OrderniL) and length ratio ( i +1 ) were
wise stream length, average bifurcation ratio (ni+1
Licalculated for the entire watershed. The findings are presented in the Table below:
Stream Number
Order

Stream(Km)

Length Bifurcation Ratio Length Ratio

1

2875

1433.553

4.3

0.29

2

669

422.1149

4.61

0.59

3

145

247.7906

5.18

0.44

4

28

109.2760

3.5

0.52

5

8

57.13743

4

0.79

6

2

44.89349

2

1

TOTAL

3727

2314.77

3.93

0.61

Some characteristics of the watershed and stream morphology are presented here in the
Table below:PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 187 of 402

Watershed Characteristics

Value

Mean Stream Length (Km)

0.62

Stream Frequency (Per Sq Km)

4.97

Drainage Density ( Km per Sq Km)

3.09

Drainage Texture (per Km)

16.36

Constant Channel Maintenance

0.32

Texture Ratio

12.62

Circulatory Ratio

0.18

th

Some of he channels in the 4 Order are Kanko Jan, Dhakhichu Langso, Barjuri, Barjan
Langso, Dedhara Nadi, Lachin Juri, Thedang Nadi, Dering Nadi, Poru Langso, Bar Diphlu
Nadi, Ahang Langso, Kohra Nadi, Haru Kohora Nadi, Haru Deopani Nadi, Deopani Nadi,
Langchingre Langso, Theak Langso, Kulapani Langso, Langkangtang Langso, Pan Juri,
Tankarbil Nadi, Kangrengding Nadi, Monkro Nadi among others.
The streams in the 5th order are Kanko Jan, Bar Diphlu Nadi, Dedhara Nadi, Kohora Nadi,
Deopani Nadi, Bar Katak Langso, Kalpani Nadi among othes.
The streams of the 6th order are Deopani River and Difaloo River.
Watershed Degradation:
Photographic evidence partly has been collected to show that hotels, lodges and dhabas
have been set up right on the border of the Park and along the animal corridors. The virgin
Karbi Anglong hills are now being defaced for constructing more lodges and hotels.
Quarrying and stone crusher activities are going on in the Karbi Anglong side undeterred.
These areas are very much a part of the Kaziranga watershed. However, as currently there
is no law to take the watershed of a forest/ sanctuary/ national park into the protection andmanagement fold unless the same is so notified as Sanctuary/National Park. In absence ofsuch a legislation, the watershed areas of the Kaziranga are being damaged beyond repair.
If these damages in the watershed continue unabated, the tributaries and streams that flow
through Kaziranga would increase in their sediment supply and destabilize the bank-line,
enhance erosion and hasten siltation of the beels and water-bodies which are lifeline of therhinoceros habitat. Dr. S. K. Lahiri has identified increased sediment load in tributary
streams as one of the reasons for instability of the Brahmaputra river.
In such a situation, complete protection of the watershed of Kaziranga comprising of rivers
and streams such as Dhansiri, Borjuri, Kohora, Difaloo, Kanchanjuri, Deopani, Kalapani etc.
which all originate in the hills of Karbi Anglong is a must.
The issue here is of governance. The Karbi Anglong is a Sixth Schedule area, and isgoverned by elected representatives of the people. Therefore, the only way is to declareanother National Park to the south of Kaziranga.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 188 of 402

Communities in the Watershed:
The watershed described above, falling in three districts of Golaghat, Nagaon and Karbi
Anglong is dotted all along the foot hills, and at several places in the higher reaches, withrows of human habitation. The finger-prints of human activity is very visibly displayed in theentire watershed. In fact, it is this biotic interference that has forced the author to put inwriting in this Report that if the watershed is not protected, nurtured back to its original
health, there is constant threat to the very survival of Kaziranga. The watershed is a greatreflection of the ongoing conflicts between conservation and development, between
protection of wildlife and human needs, between traditional ways of life and modern
economic growth drivers.
The valley of the watershed is a bowl of human growth and development, which is rapidly
growing by leaps and bound, and today threatens the very survival of Kaziranga. If
unchecked, Kaziranga is surely destined to become an island in the sea of development all
around. The foothills have started to get the impact of this tremendous development
momentum, by way of denudation, cutting, mining, human occupation and construction
activities. The higher reaches are inhabited by Karbi tribes who continue to practice slashand burn agriculture even today, allowing to burn up huge chunks of forests.
It is to be reiterated here that the watershed as described in the paragraphs above coupledwith the hills covering the Mikir Hills RF, Kaliyani RF and the Singhasan Hills form a single
composite bio-diversity hotspot and a unique conservation reserve that must be preserved
for all times to come, even if by declaring the entire area as a Tiger Reserve.
However, the brief point to be made here is that there are a large number of stakeholders,
communities, villages, community based organizations, village level councils and other local
stakeholders within this watershed who need to be made a part of the conservation
movement whether for Kaziranga or Karbi Anglong wildlife conservation. A model ofconservation and development needs to be evolved by consulting all stakeholders through aseries of engagements, role playing and mutual understanding.
Conservancy Regimes in the North Karbi Anglong:
The northern part of the Karbi Anglong, most of which falls in the Karbi Anglong (East)
Forest Division has several wildlife sanctuaries namely:
1. East Karbi Anglong WLS having an area of 221.81 sq km constituted vide
Notification No. FRW.57/99/51 Dt. 27 Th July, 2004 consisting of the entire
Mikir Hills RF falling in the Dokmoka range of KA(E).
2. Nambor WLS having an area of 37 sq km constituted vide Notification No.
FRW.57/99/38 Dt. 27Th July, 2000
3. Garampani WLS having an area of 6 sq km
4. Karbi Anglong WLS having an area of 96 sq km constituted vide Notification
No. FRW.57/99/42 Dt. 21St July, 2000, which is adjacent to the south of
Kaziranga National Park near Sildubi.
The total area under wildlife sanctuary in the Division comes to 360.81 sq km.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 189 of 402

In addition, the Division has a number of RF and DCRF areas. These are listed here:
1. Kaliyani RF
207.36 sq km
2. Nambor (West) RF 166.33 sq km
3. Jungthung RF
32.57 sq km
4. Sildharampur RF 21.54 sq km
5. Chelabor RF
33.55 sq km
Total RF Area:
461.35 sq km
6. Longnit DCRF
114.93 sq km
7. Patradisa DCRF
67.34 sq km
8. Jamuna DCRF
113.09 sq km
9. Hidipi DCRF
20.08 sq km
10. Mahamaya DCRF 55.81 sq km
11. Khanbamon DCRF 165.50 sq km
Total DCRF Area: 536.75 sq km
Similarly, southward, the areas fall under the jurisdiction of the Karbi Anglong (West)
Division. Marat Longri (meaning “Abode of the Wildlife” in Karbi language) is the only wildlife
sanctuary in this Division. Marat Longri WLS covers an area of 451 sq km, constituted vide
Notification No. FRW.50/99/14 Dt. 17Th April, 2003 spread over the erstwhile reserved
forests Kaki RF, Disama RF, Myungdisa DCRF and Inglong Kiri DCRF. It is administeredcurrently under Bokolia Range, Borlongfar and Central range, Diphu.
The Division has got the following RF and DCRF:
1. Dhansiri RF
770.58 sq km
2. Daldali RF
123.33 sq km
Total RF Area:
3. Borlongfar DCRF 77.31 sq km
4. Matipung DCRF
33
sq km
5. Tamulbari DCRF
13.86 sq km
6. Langcholiet DCRF 1.60 sq km
Total DCRF Area:

893.91 sq km

125.77 sq km

There are also several Proposed RFs (PRF) such as Borjuri PRF, Haitha Pahar PRF,
Kaziranga PRF, but no records could be made available from the concerned Divisions.
However, the total conservancy regime south of the Kaziranga National Park is shown
below:Sl.
No.

Division

WLS(Sq. Km)RF(Sq Km)DCRF(Sq Km)PRF(Sq Km)TOTAL(Sq Km)1

Karbi Anglong East

360.81461.35536.751358.912

Karbi Anglong West451.00893.91125.771470.68

TOTAL

811.811355.26662.522829.59th

It is important to mention that Kaziranga is recognized as the hub of the 4 Elephant Rangein the country with three Elephant Reserves (ER) under its fold spread over Assam andNagaland. The three elephant Reserves are:
1. Kaziranga Karbi Anglong ER Area 3270 sq km Notified on 17.04.2003
2. Dhansiri Lungding ER
Area 2740 sq km notified on 19.04.2003
3. Intanki ER
Area 202 sq km Notified on 28.02.2005

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 190 of 402

The first two ER fall in the Kaziranga Karbi Anglong conservation complex described above,
while the third ER falls in Nagaland. There are more than 2500 elephant population roamingin these reserves. Elephants interact variously with the human habitations and populations
as they move along in the landscape. Elephants possess multi frequency short and longrange communication capabilities [Garstang, 2004], have definite memory map or evenworking memory [Byrne et al, 2009]. Some local inhabitants of Kaziranga informed that they
could tell by behaviour whether the elephant was a resident of Kaziranga or not. On theother hand research studies in South Africa [King et al, 2014] show that Elephants could
distinguish between friendly tribes and inimical tribes. Elephants are long range animals andclearly define the necessity of conservation over landscape level, in absence of which werun the risk of losing our most treasured wildlife.
Possible Governance Mechanisms of the Kaziranga Watershed:
The Kaziranga watershed falls in three districts. Since Golaghat and Nagaon districts arewithin the general areas of the State, there is little or no issue in administration of theseareas. However, the majority of the area falls within the Karbi Anglong Autonomous District
Council (KAADC) which is a Sixth Schedule area. Though technically, Reserved Forest andProtected areas do not come under control of the Council, the administration is practicallycontrolled by them. There could be constitutional challenges in bringing the watershed areas
along with Kaziranga Tiger Reserve under a single administrative control, which is highly
desirable.
Several other possibilities are suggested here in order of preference:
1. Declare the watershed along with Mikir Hills RF and Kaliyani RF as a National Park (itmay require resettlement of communities)
2. Declare Kaziranga Watershed, Mikir Hills RF, Kaliyani RF, Sinhasan Hills as a Tiger
Reserve
3. Protect the entire watershed as a wildlife sanctuary
4. Form a Wildlife division in Karbi Anglong and hand over the watershed areas to thisdivision by declaring it an Eco-sensitive Zone of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve
Whatever be the governance structure, the protection measures must be extended in fullmeasure in the watershed areas either by Kaziranga authorities, or by the Council
authorities or jointly by both to ensure that:
1. No rhino poaching occurs
2. No killing of wild animals occurs for meat consumption
3. There is free passage between Kaziranga and Karbi Anglong for wild animals
4. Elephants can become resident in Karbi Anglong
5. No mining or cutting of hills is allowed
6. No felling in the forest is allowed
7. No fresh breaking of forest land is allowed
8. Additional population (in the future) needs to move out of the watershed

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 191 of 402

13.2.2 Tea Gardens around Kaziranga
Since landscape concept is based on broader geographical approach over land parcels
under various types of ownerships and land-uses, tea gardens become a very importantcomponent of the Kaziranga landscape. It may be noted here that the tea estates that may
eventually fall within the proposed Kaziranga Landscape would be required to be brought
under the regulation so that co-existence of human and wildlife in these parts can be better
managed. The tea estates likely to fall within the landscape are:1. Amgoorie Tea Estate
2. Anandpur Tea Estate
3. Behora Tea Estate
4. Bokakhat Tea Estate
5. Borchapori Tea Estate
6. Burrapahar Tea Estate
7. Diffloo Tea Estate
8. Hatikhuli Tea Estate
9. Jagdamba Tea Estate
10. Kaliabor Tea Estate
11. Methoni Tea Estate
12. Nahorjan Tea Estate
13. Sagmootea Tea Estate
14. Seconee Te Estate
The Table below gives some of the key statistics of the tea gardens:Name of the
TE
1

Y.O.E

Area
(Ha)

Tea
Area
(Ha)

Last 3 Yrs
Production(MKg)

Workers

Families

2

3

4

5

6

7

Amguri1880

143.61

65.58

0.298

114

73

Anandpur

1930

100

88

1.058

120

45

Behora1905

671.53381.19

1.276

777

601

Bokakhat

1877

414.95304.39

1.898

1023

611

Borchapori

18791189.72 784.42

4.228

1063 P+1605 T

823

Burrapahar

1938

284.53216.90

1.666

1020

668

Diffloo

1890

676.37491.34

0.934

1454

613 R+ 73 NR

Hatikhuli

1904

674.65474.571.705

896 P + 1230 T

563

Jagdamba

1876

515

227.52

1.65

1112

278

Methoni

1914

656.74461.64

2418

851

Nahorjan

1895

995.35688.75

1.1051038 P+600 T

625

Sagmootea

1935

632.93442.29

1.050

890

625

Seconee1880

423.35319.39

1.257

794

634

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 192 of 402

Though it cannot be denied that these gardens have been existing (atleast some of them)prior to formation of the Kaziranga Reserve Forest in 1908, yet it cannot be denied thatmost of these gardens were once upon a time virgin forests that were felled and plantedwith tea. It is far beyond in time now to ask questions about the rational and wisdom infelling large forest tracts and converting to plantations of tea. However, today in the wakeof threats of climate change change and rising temperatures that may lead to several
periods of drought and floods, migration of species, inundation of land, rising of river beds
etc., there is an urgent need to do a complete rethink on how to reclaim of these areas
back into the fold of forestry and wildlife as a future shield of protection. Climate change isalso linked with appearance of new viruses, new diseases, and rise in unknown healthissues. Economically backward sections of society, especially the tea garden communities
may become one of the most vulnerable sections of society in the near future where
effects of climate change could be most evident. Therefore, new set of strategies need tobe adopted, at least as experiments within the Kaziranga landscape, where the tea garden
communities have better socio-economic model to follow in lieu of what the community has
been used to for almost a century.
This is also no denying that the rhinos of Kaziranga need more land to survive, and the tea
plantations are potential candidates for the same. However, a very well thought of strategy
needs to be evolved by way of which, not only an alternate viable economic growth model
emerges for this economically backward community, but also some additional land is madeavailable for the rhinos. Thus, the tea gardens surrounding the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve
are key in resolving the conservation vs development paradigm. It must be mentionedthat there is an example of tea garden land being acquired for Kaziranga National
Park in the 4th Addition areas. It was in 2008 when the Burrapahar Tea Garden was
sold out at a price of Rs. 5,81,25,000.00, and at the same time the Department
acquired 221 Bighas 0 Katha 8 Lessas of the Burrapahar Tea estate land at acompensation of Rs. 1,51,50,071.00 being the cost of land and trees. The land was
finally taken over on the 25th October, 2010. Of this the land cost was Rs.
57,48,080.00, and the cost of tea bushes and standing trees was Rs. 49,20,984.00.
Rest being taxes etc.
However, buying a tea garden is not just about land and tea bushes. Its more aboutcommunities that derive their sustenance from them. Before we go to new strategies, itwould be worthwhile to understand the basic principles that govern the livelihoods in thetea garden areas.
Labour Welfare:
All the regulation in respect of labour and workers employed in a tea plantation aregoverned by the Plantations Labour Act, 1951. The Act defines “worker”, “family” (andincluding dependent parents of a male worker), and lays down the welfare measures thatmust be adopted by the management of a tea garden. These measures include facilities ofdrinking water, latrines, medical facilities, canteen, creche, recreation facilities, education
facilities, housing (and compensation resulting from collapse a house). It also provides forsmaller amenities such as umbrella, raincoats and blankets for the workers.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 193 of 402

The Act defines wage as per the section 2(h) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The
workers are permitted to work for not more than 48 hours a week (and overtime to be paid
at twice the rates of the wages for extra work done not exceeding total of 9 hours of workin a day, and 54 hours in a week. The workers are entitled for paid leave of 1 (one) day forevery 20 days of work performed.
The Plantation Labour (Amendment) Act, 2010 also additionally talks of safety in handlingchemicals such as insecticides and pesticides, and lays down provisions for providing
infrastructure for washing, bathing and cloack room facility.
Cost to Company:
The tea companies have to follow the provisions of the Plantation Labour Act, 1951.
Though the actual implementation of the Act may vary from garden to garden, depending
upon local situations (and often historical reasons) and the overall philanthropic andwelfare policies of the company itself. The tea companies provide a large basket of goods
and services to their workers which include subsidized ration (such as rice and atta),
health care, housing, education, leave benefits etc. The ration is supplied on fortnightly
basis to the workers. The tea management purchases the food grains from the Food andCivil Supplies Department at concessional rates and distribute the same to the workers atfurther subsidies as a part of the wage. In Assam, for example, the Govt allocates about
7000 metric of tones (MT) of rice and 5000 MT of wheat per month to the tea gardens.
Rice supplied by government costs Rs 830 per quintal and while wheat costs Rs 610 per
quintal. In open market the rice will cost Rs 2000 and wheat Rs 1750 per quintal. As
reported by Milli Gpoal [2013], an adult is entitled to receive 0.276 gram rice @ Rs. 0.47 /kg. and 0.276 gram wheat @ Rs. 0.54/kg. and his dependent(s) receives 0.225 gram rice
and wheat per day @ Rs. 0.54/kg. In addition labours are allowed collect fire-wood.
Though it is normally said that wages of the tea garden workers are low, the cost tocompany could be as high as Rs. 185.00 per day, against the carry home cash wage rateof Rs. 94.00 per day. The wage rates (for the Brahmaputra Valley) in the past are shown in
the table below:
Year

Wage Rate
(Rs.)

2011

66.50

2012

84.00

2013

89.00

2014

94.00

Socio-Economic Conditions of the Tea Workers:
Several books and research studies have shown that the socio-economic condition of thetea garden workers is not very good. Noted among the works are that of Saikia Biswajit[2009], Singh S.N. Et al [2006] who wrote 'Political Problems of Tea Gardens Workers- A
Study of Assam'- a book very relevant for the Barak Valley tea gardens. Quoting from Milli
Gopal [2013], the various research studies summarized show very poor economic
condition of the tea garden workers. To quote various authors, Joshi [2005] observes thatPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 194 of 402

they are still living under the state of practical slavery. A labour has no means of freeing
himself from his serfdom, no education to be self reliant. They have few schools in the tea
gardens and out of nearly 10,00,000 labours on the tea gardens only 5000 are literate,
while Singh [2006] states that their economic base was without any solid foundation which
made their life most sorrowful. The economic development could not take place;consequently, development in other socio cultural segments remained stagnant for long.
G.K Medhi et al [2006] highlights prevalence of malnutrition among tea garden school age
children (6-14 years). Prevalence of wasting, stunting and underweight was 21.2%, 47.4%
and 51.7% respectively among the children in the age group of 6-8 years. Prevalence ofstunting and thinness was 53.6% and 53.9% respectively among the children in the agegroup of 9-14 years age group.
Socio-economic backwardness on one side, the other important facet is the ill effects ofusing large amount of chemicals, pesticides, insecticides and fertilizers in the tea gardensthat has started to threaten not only the serenity of the local climes, but also health of thecommunities around the tea gardens. A study by Goswami [2013], in his study on small tea
growers, highlights these aspects of the tea gardens very well. According to Goswami,“Every 200 respondent use different types of chemical fertilizers (urea, Murate of Potas,
Super phosphate), pesticides, insecticides, growth promoter for their production purposes.
Different types of insects are Red Spider, Tea mosquito Bag(Helopelotis), Looper etc. For
these insects various insecticides are used such as Monocotophos 46%, Ethian, Thaiodin,
Desis,etc. For control of grasses and climbers the Glyphosate is the only remedy. These
are sprayed with the help of sprayer after proper dilution. Growth promoters are Multiplex
zinc high, Agrimic, YTD mixture, etc. Among the respondent 5% are used organic manure(Max soil care, Max crystals etc.) and organic pesticides (Max cannon super, Max stick,
Max flash etc.). All these organic product are from Maxgrow Biotech Pvt. Ltd. and the main
motto of these products is to save the earth and save life. But due to non availability andhighly expensive of the organic product the growers are not interested to use. Moreover,they also know about the harmful effects of chemical fertilizers and pesticides which may
cause different types of human diseases( such as cancer, heart disease, high bloodpressure, skin disease etc.), destroy the natural organism of the soil, polluting theenvironment.” He further says, “Most of the growers and workers have severe pain on thestomach, headache, indigestion, skin diseases. Birth defects, nerve damage and genetic
mutation are also seen and these are identified by medical practitioner is that pesticides
enter in the human body through inhalation of aerosols, dust and vapor that containpesticides and harms the human body. Moreover, soil erosion, tank and river water ispolluted near the tea garden area are also seen in that particular area of Golaghat district.
Chemical pesticides contaminate the ground water in polluting the primary source of ourdrinking water. In these areas living organism are also reduced due to use of chemicalfertilizers and pesticides.”According to Medhi [2006], there are several health and hygene related issues plaguingthe community namely nutritional problems like underweight among children (59.9%),
thinness among adults (69.8%) and micro-nutrient deficiency disorder like anemia (72%)
are widespread. Some of the common infections diseases prevalent among the community
are worm infestations (65.4%), respiratory problems (6.7%), diarrhea (1.7%), skininfections, fileria (0.6%) and pulmonary tuberculosis (11.7%). The other diseases foundPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 195 of 402

prevalent were hypertension (45.9%), senile cataract (25.3%), epilepsy (7.3%) and backpain (8.7%).
Development and Welfare Schemes:
There are several welfare schemes which are statutory in nature, especially related to thesocial security such as Assam Tea Plantations Provident Fund Scheme 1955, Pension
Scheme 1967, Family Pension Scheme 1972, Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme 1984.
Most of these schemes call for contributions from the employees, employers and often thecontributors. However, the pension schemes are unique in the sense that the resources
for building the pension fund come neither from the employee nor the employer. Rather,
the fund is built up out of surplus interest from investment and contribution from the Govt.
of India. The Board of the ATPPF & PF Scheme and Govt. of India contribute at the rate of
2-1/3 % and 1-1/6% respectively of the total wages of the members at the Provident Fund
scheme. In addition to these two types of pension benefits as mentioned above, a member
is paid Invalid Pension @ Rs. 100/- p.m. if the member becomes invalid while at work due
to accident or any unforeseen reason. However, the main issue with the PF scheme is thepending liabilities of the defaulting gardens as a result of which the workers are deprived of
the benefits under the scheme.
In order to achieve socio-economic development of the tea tribes people, the Governmentof Assam implements welfare schemes through a separate Directorate viz. Directorate for
Welfare of Tea and Ex-Tea Garden Tribes, Assam which was established during 19831984. To further strengthen the delivery mechanism and speedy implementation of welfare
schemes, the Government of Assam created Tea Tribes Welfare Department in 2004 as aseparate Department vide AR&T Department Notification No. AR. 32/2004/34 dated 31-092004. The mandate of the Department in short is as follows:• To accelerate the socio-economic development of the Tea Tribes of Assam, toenhance the gainful employability of the tea tribes manpower.
• To gear up the activities for spreading out institutionalization of education at
different levels viz. primary/secondary and higher etc.
• To coordinate with other development departments for providing basic amenities
like health and hygiene, sanitation, safe drinking water, electricity etc.
• To monitor and assess all development works undertaken by various departments
in areas inhabited by tea tribes or ex-tea tribes.
• To create awareness among women for creating women Self Help Groups incoordination with various organizations including voluntary organizations.
• To monitor and coordinate with the management of the tea gardens for providing
Eco-friendly working environment.
• To develop appropriate network between Government departments and othervarious organizations with a view to enabling the speedy disposal of mattersrelating to tea garden tribes.
During the 11th Plan period, the allocation and expenditure for the Department stood as
follows:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 196 of 402

Sl. No.

Year

Plan Allocation(Rs. In Crores)

Expenditure(Rs. in Crores)

1

2007-08

23.00

19.57

2

2008-09

37.00

37.00

3

2009-10

23.00

23.00

4

2010-11

47.95

49.95

5

2011-12

21.00

21.00

151.95150.52

Then, there are several infrastructure related grant schemes of the Tea Board of India
such that grants for school buildings and hospitals in tea garden areas, improvement ofsports, disability grant, scholarships, book grant etc.
Suggested Strategies and Roadmap:
Therefore, the key challenges that a tea garden in the Kaziranga Conservation andDevelopment Landscape may throw open are:1. Special rehabilitation and alternate livelihood packages for communities that partwith substantial chunk of the tea garden land in the interest of Kaziranga.
2. General socio-economic uplift of the tea garden communities through wellorchestrated green growth and low carbon strategies.
3. Compensation packages (could also mean annually) for tea gardens that comeforward to go green and ready to suffer losses for sake of Kaziranga and to reduce
ill effects of chemicals on health of communities and local environment.
4. A complete and wholesome skilling package for existing workers, the youth andwomen.
5. How to ensure that general well being parameters such as IMR, MMR, institutionaldeliveries, incidence of anemia, 100% education for all etc. in the Kaziranga
Landscape can be made equal to or better than the national averages.
In the opinion of the author, the following scenario-strategies may emerge after a careful
study of the facts and circumstances concerning each of the gardens in question:

1. Economically unviable tea gardens may be procured by the Authority
2. All garden areas falling in the corridor, must be procured wholly or partially.
3. Highly profitable gardens (with long track records of profits and good governancefor the workers and their families), subject to limitations of serial 2 above, may beallowed to continue to function with added conditions of adopting green and organic
growth strategies.
4. A garden in future becoming unviable, may have to go the way indicated in serial 1
above.
The strategies for enhancing livelihoods and alternative economic opportunities for the tea
garden communities, whose gardens get taken over by the Authority, need a soundthought process and thorough study. However, certain ideas are presented here for further
studies and debate:
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 197 of 402

Education:
1. All students who secure very good marks in schools, need to be identified, tracked,
supported with scholarships, books, uniform, study tours, project works andassignments.
2. After 10th class, efforts should be made to fully sponsor them to study in goodschools and colleges outside the landscape areas; and tutoring them for medical
and engineering streams must be carried out.
3. All students who pass well in 12 th must be fully supported for their medical,
engineering, law and science, arts and commerce graduation studies.
4. Tying up for employment opportunities, skilling and grooming should be done at thislevel.
5. Those who fail to make it, should be taken in the fold of vocation education stream
as suggested below.
Vocational Education:
1. According to the author, vocational education should be divided into two verticals withpossibilities of cross-over at certain levels.
2. The students who are not able to perform altogether should be brought into the fold of
National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) Framework, whereby they are taught purely
job traits such as qualified drivers, plumbers, electricians, stitching, car mechanic etc.
with minimum scholastic inputs (only enough for basic communication oral andwritten skills). The students in this vertical should be offered only vocational degrees,as per the norm of the vocation concerned.
3. The students who are mediocre, should fall in the National Vocational Education
Qualification (NVEQ) Framework, wherein the students has an opportunity to get anormal scholastic degree such as HSLC or HSSLC or B. Sc. While having certain
subjects or courses from vocational streams. IT Software, hardware, networking, help
desk operator etc. are some of the job profiles that match this category. The
vocational streams that require a good amount of scholastic inputs such as goodknowledge of electricity etc. should be brought under this fold. However, such
students would typically get employed after passing their 12th or graduation in various
IT companies (just to mention as an example).
Health:Health and well being of the tea tribe communities inhabiting within the Kaziranga landscapeshould be one of the prime concerns. Though the issues of health shall be separately
covered in more generic way in the Chapter 15, here only a few points are being covered.
The following suggestions are being forth here specific to the tea garden communities:
1. Baseline health survey of all age groups of the tea garden communities within thelandscape2. Provision for clean drinking water
3. Awareness for hygiene
4. Health insurance
5. Prevention of malnutrition among children
6. Prevention of anemia among women, especially pregnant women
7. Ensuring 100% institutional delivery by incentivising the stakeholders
8. Strengthening the institution of Asha Workers
9. Pre-natal and Post natal care
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 198 of 402

10. Strengthening of existing Govt and tea garden health care machinery for preventionof malaria and communicable diseases
11. Use of plant based insect repellants
Housing:
Though housing is a part of the welfare measure to be undertaken by the tea garden
management, it may not be out of place to mention here that most of the housing has been
described merely as “labour lines”, meaning a row of joint houses with a couple of rooms
each. Most of these labour lines are often found in dilapidated condition, haphazardly built
and definitely serves only as bare minimum accommodation. These lines are often attacked
by elephants moving along the corridors, being attracted by liquor, leading to, sometimes,
death of people.
The tea gardens which shall contribute more than 50% of their area under tea cultivation forthe sake of Kaziranga, should deserve a very special compensation package in terms ofmodern/green housing for all the families residing within the garden land. Since all such land
would be part of the corridors for animal movement, the housing projects would need special
consideration. The houses could be on raised platform, more open for sunlight and air,usage of solar lighting, provision for aesthetic design, multi-storeyed, space for gardens/
parks, community life etc.
Livelihoods:
It is often said that children of tea garden community go back to the garden as labour when
they grow older. There has been earlier provision for child labour in the tea gardens withwage rates reduced for children. However, the Plantation Labour (Amendment) Act, 2010
strictly, and correctly so, prohibits child labour completely. In the tea tribe community one
needs to ensure that there is 100% enrollment, and every child is tracked, as per theeducation strategy suggested in the earlier paragraphs. Within the Kaziranga landscapeeffort should be to ensure that maximum possible children of the tea garden community are
given opportunities that are available to children elsewhere in the country, and that every
child has the potential and capacity to choose his or her vocation to the best of his or her
abilities.
As regards the adult population, the adage is that a tea garden worker is fit for nothing elseas the system is so well oiled that he has very little motivation to walk away from theestablished rug ma-roll of the tea gardens chores, wages and perks. It is interesting,however, to note that Singh [2006] points out that certain workers get to earn more thanothers as they are more enterprising and generate additional avenues of income. Therefore,
for the existing workers and youth, there could be two ways to look at the issue of
livelihoods. Firstly, the ways in which more livelihood options could be provided for theworkers, such as temporary workers, enabling them to generate more income. Secondly,
extensive skill development programmes for the uneducated/ educated unemployed youthof the tea communities for alternate options of livelihoods.
13.2.3 Brahmaputra River and Chapories
The stretch of the Brahmaputra river from the easternmost part of Kaziranga National Parkto Orang National Park is about 150 km spanning across as many as 45 major chapories.
Part of these areas fall in 6 th Addition to the Kaziranga National Park, amounting to 401.50
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 199 of 402

sq km. The area covered from the west of Kalia Bhomora bridge to Orang National Park
comes to 479.74 sq km. Thus, the total area under the Brahmaputra river covered comesto 881.24 sq km. Of the 45 river islands surveyed, 29 fall within the 6 th Addition areas.
Within the 6th Addition areas, about 16 islands bear signs of human activity in form of cattle
rearing. There are graziers who rear cattle (mostly water buffalo) by erecting temporary
huts called khutis on the chapories. The number of grazing huts may vary from 5 to 15,
while the livestock population may vary from 250 to 3000 numbers. The typical area of akhuti could vary from 0.5 sq km to 9 sq km. The total livestock population within the 6 thAddition area was about 20,300. Each of the settlements of khutis has about 5-25 numberof people managing the livestock.
However, west of Kaliabhomora, most of the islands are having human habitation. Most of
the settlers were engaged in agriculture, while some of them also work as daily wage
earners. There are more than 3000 households in these islands, and the estimated humanpopulation may be around 26,000. The livestock population is estimated at around 16500.
Signs of Wildlife Movement:
The river since time immemorial has been used as movement corridor by wild animals
such as rhinoceros, tigers and elephants. However, scientific documentation efforts havestarted only few years back after wide spread us of GPS, sign survey and camera trap
mark recapture (CTMR) technologies in the wildlife areas.
GPS locations of rhino citing between Kaliabhomora and Laokhowa WLS from 2008 to2013 showed that rhinos were located at 29 different locations within this landscape. This
clearly establishes that rhinos from Kaziranga do migrate to Laokhowa WLS/ Burachapori
areas and from thence to Orang.
The WWF in association with the Forest Department conducted a detailed survey of theBrahmaputra river corridors for signs of tiger and other carnivores in February-March,2014 using established techniques of sign surveys, presence absence index etc. The
team carried out about 132.75 km transect walks, with a minimum of 1 km and maximumof 13 km. The mean encounter rate (number sighted per km) was found to be 3.61±1.47.
The team detected presence of tigers in 18 islands, and sighted a tiger in the Hatibalu
Char. Signs of tigresses with cubs were also found. This indicates that during breeding
time, tigresses search for safer heavens for their cubs.
The Eastern Swamp Deer have been observed to swim across the Brahmaputra river
channels and cross over to the char areas. The wild buffalo, elephants and rhinos are wellknown to cross over to the islands and wander around. Foot print of the rhinos have often
been found in several of these chapories.
It must, however, be admitted that the current protection system is confined to the core of
430 sq km of the Kaziranga National Park, leaving most of the area vulnerable topoachers. Using the landscape approach, it should be possible within next 2-3 years togive complete protection to these areas in phased manner as follows:
1. Core of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve in next 6 months to be fully protected
2. 6th Addition areas should be made fully safe in next year and half.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 200 of 402

3. West of Kalia Bhomora to Orang National Park should be made safe for wildlife in
the third phase within a period of 1 to 1½ years.
13.2.4 Corridors
The corridors have been mentioned in some detail in the Chapter 2 and certain strategies
have been suggested for corridor retrofitting in Chapter 11. Chapter 11 talks about
notification of the identified corridors (structural as well as functional), especially along therivers on the north bank. These notified corridors shall also be an integral part of the
Kaziranga Conservation and Development Landscape. The regulation of zonation, anddevelopment strategies shall equally apply in these areas as well.
13.2.5 Animal Migration in the Landscape
The large mammals such as tigers, rhinoceros, elephants, wild buffalo etc. have long range
migrations in and around Kaziranga. Through camera trap techniques, it has been
established that tigers are indeed moving to Burachapori, Laokhowa, Karbi Anglong andNameri. Similarly over several years, it has been established that rhinoceros migrates to
Laokhowa, Burachapori, Karbi Anglong and chapories (river islands mostly comprising ofsand and primary growth of grasses) of Majuli, the largest river island of the world.
Elephants are known to migrate to Karbi Anglong.
Due to fragmentation the migration corridors have been broken at several places. This has
led to exposure and increase in the animal-human interactions. More frequent number ofsuch incidents only leads to trapping/ capture of wild cats and relocating them to zoos/ or
killing of animals by the angry mobs. Whatever the consequence, the gene-pool in the wild
is being lost. In my opinion, leopards are the biggest victim of the broken corridors. Like theCheetah, one day leopards would become extinct from the wild.
For effective management of the fragile habitat of Kaziranga, healthy migration of wildlife isa necessity. If migration is stopped, Kaziranga habitat would not only wither away, but also
the animals would perish in course of time. To me, confinement of large mammals in such alarge population itself is a bigger threat to the survival of rhinoceros and elephants thatpoaching.
I do not buy the argument of research biologists and wildlife experts who say that the
productivity of Kaziranga is so high that it can sustain wildlife in the long run. Sucharguments would ultimately go against the conservation values that we are fighting for.
When Kaziranga was constituted in 1908-1917, it finally had an area of 430 sq km. Of this,today 150 sq km is in the river Brahmaputra. There were only 40 rhinoceros then, and today
2300 or more. How much area we have been able to add onto the Park. All additions put
together, we have total area no ore than 848 sq km. Per sq km area (per capita area)
available for the rhinoceros is only 0.2 (against 1.48 in Kruger). Though the calculations canbe fine tuned to show that we have effectively more area for the rhinoceros in Kaziranga, but
this does not serve any practical purpose.
We have to target somehow to provide an area of at least 2000 sq km to the rhinoceros, if
the future of the species is to be secured.
13.3

The KLCDA Framework

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 201 of 402

The KLCDA would require a new legislation altogether. However, a brief outline is provided
here:
1. Aims and Objects
2. Governance Structure
3. Executive Structure
4. Funding
5. Powers and Functions
13.3.1 Aims and Objects
The aims and objects of the proposed KLCDA may be:
1. To protect Kaziranga landscape
2. To protect the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros
3. To conserve the floral and faunal biodiversity of the Kaziranga landscape
4. To usher the era of low carbon growth and green development in the landscape
5. To work for economic uplift of the population residing within the landscape and6. To showcase to the world community a unique model of conservation and growth
There also could be missions such as:
1. Mission “Poaching Free Kaziranga”
2. Mission “Green Growth, Green Development, Green Kaziranga”
3. Mission “Green Management, Clean Management”
Whereas the 1st Mission is very clear that the effort of the management should be that no
rhino (and no other animal) is poached within the jurisdiction of the authority, the other two
missions point towards development issues surrounding the Park/ Tiger Reserve. The 2 ndMission talks of new ways of ushering development, employment and growth opportunities
within the landscape for the economic uplift of the fringe populations of the Park/ Tiger
Reserve, ensuring that the people are not deprived of modern amenities and development.
However, all such growth and development should be low carbon, green and organic. The
3rd Mission talks of introducing adopting low carbon strategies and technologies in day to
day management, infrastructure creation and growth of the Park/ Tiger Reserve.
13.3.2 Governance Structure
The proposed governance structure may be as follows:
1. A Board of Governors headed by the Chief Minister Assam, Minister Environment &Forests, Govt of Assam as Co Chairman and the Chief Secretary as Vice Chairman
and following members:• MLAs of the surrounding LACs
• CEM of KAADC• NTCA, Govt of India,• PCCF & HoFF
• PCCF(WL) & CWLW
• Principal Secretaries of stakeholder Departments (Forest, Revenue,
Finance, P&D, Health, Home & Political, Power, P&RD, Agriculture,
AH&V, Transport, PWD, WPT&BC etc.)• Addl PCCF/ CCF/ CF (Karbi Anglong, Sonitpur & Jorhat)• Commissioners, Upper Assam Division & Lower Assam Division

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 202 of 402

•Deputy Commissioners of Golaghat, Nagaon, Sonitpur and Karbi
Anglong
Superintendents of Police of Golaghat, Nagaon, Sonitpur and Karbi
Anglong• DFOs (EAWL, Nagaon Wildlife, Orang, Golaghat, KA(E), Nagaon,
Sonitpur(E))• SDO © of Bokakhat, Kaliabor• Local members• EDC Presidents (On Rotation)• International Members• Conservation Bodies' Representatives• Chief Executive Officer & Director, KNP/ FD, KTR as Member
Secretary
2. An Executive Council headed by the Minister, Env & Forests, Govt. of Assam as
Chairperson and the following members:• Principal Secretary (Forests, Revenue, Home & Political, P&RD,
Agriculture, AH&V, PWD, WPT&BC)• NTCA, Govt of India,• PCCF & HoFF
• PCCF(WL) & CWLW
• Addl PCCF/ CCF/ CF (Karbi Anglong, Sonitpur & Jorhat)• DFOs (EAWL, Nagaon Wildlife, Orang, Golaghat, KA(E), Nagaon,
Sonitpur(E))• SDO © of Bokakhat, Kaliabor• Local members• EDC Presidents (On Rotation)• Conservation Bodies' Representatives• Chief Executive Officer & Director, KNP/ FD, KTR as Member
Secretary•

3. The Authority may have the following permanent Committees• Conservation and Development Council headed by the Chief
Secretary and (with Expert members)• Finance Committee headed by the PS, Env & Forests, Govt of Assam• Land Advisory Committee headed by the PS, Revenue & Disaster
Management• Development Committee headed by the PCCF(WL) & CWLW
• Working Committee headed by the CEO
4. The KTCF may continue to function with modifications such that the Executive
Council of the Authority shall be deemed to be the Governing Body of the KTCF,
and the Working Committee shall be deemed to be the Executive Committee of the
KTCF.
5. The Local Advisory Committee shall continue to function as a Committee of thelocal stakeholders.
6. The KNPSWS shall continue to function in its current form.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 203 of 402

13.3.3 Executive Structure
The following executive structure is proposed for the Authority:
1. The CEO to be the Chief Executive of the Authority
2. The CEO to be assisted by two Addl CEO and four Deputy CEOs
3. Each Deputy CEO to be assisted by two ACFs
4. The territories of the landscape shall be in command of respective DFOs (including
a new Karbi Anglong North (WL) Division that may be created to see over thewatershed areas of Kaziranga falling in KA district
5. There will be four wings headed by one Deputy CEO namely:• Eco-Development & Eco-Tourism• Wildlife Crime Detection and Prosecution.
• Logistics and Support Services (IT, Electronics, Engineering)• Administration & Management
6. The DFO, EAWL may be restructured as discussed separately in the next chapter
7. There shall be Management Units consisting of expert NGO members andprofessionals (atleast 3-4 expert members in each group) on the following:• Low carbon sustainable growth strategies• Research and Development (Wildlife, Humanities, Infrastructure)• Project Planning and Management (including procurement)• Budget and Finance• GIS, MIS & Audit• HR
8. There would be support staff and a management and professional cadre to support
the authority as per requirement.
9. The Accounts of the Authority shall have at least two level audit namely:• Internal Audit• Statutory Audit• CAG Audit
10. The Authority shall not be a profit agency.
13.3.4 Funding
The funding sources may include:
1. Grants from the Govt. of Assam
2. Grants from the Govt. of India
3. KTCF Funds
4. KNPSWS Funds
5. Donations from India and abroad
6. CSR funding
7. Project funding
8. Income of the Authority (including income from investments, rent and levies)
9. Gifts and Bequeaths
13.3.5 Powers and Functions
The following powers and functions may be awarded to the Authority for smoothfunctioning:
1. Power to buy and sell land in its name
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 204 of 402

2. Power to bequeath land for Kaziranga National Park/ Tiger Reserve
3. Power to set up and run enterprises within the landscape
4. Power to levy toll and taxes, penalties and collect cess within the landscape or on
its borders
5. Power to invest moneys in safe instruments/ bonds
6. Power to buy land on premium within or on the periphery of the landscape
7. Power to prepare Master Plans/ Zonation Plans.
8. No unwarranted constructions/ projects/ industries to be allowed within the boundaryof the landscape.
9. Use of pesticides/ insecticides to be banned within the landscape
10. The Authority shall have the first right of refusal in case of sale of any land within thelandscape
11. Property to be purchased by the Authority from the people at market rates, as
determined by the concerned Deputy Commissioners.
12. If someone wants to leave his property for good, the Authority shall offer premiumand buy that parcel of land.
13. All Govt. land falling within the boundary of the landscape to be property of the
Authority.
14. Income of the Authority to be shared with the EDCs and recognized bodies within thelandscape as grants-in-aid/ soft loan/ guarantees for financial instruments for public
well being/ development of local institutions/ building of green infrastructure etc.
13.4

Constituents of the Proposed Kaziranga Landscape

The Kaziranga Landscape may consist of:
1. Kaziranga National Park
2. All additions to Kaziranga National Park
3. The identified Watershed of Kaziranga (this may be constitutionally difficult as thearea falls in Karbi Anglong)
4. All Tea Estates around the Kaziranga National Park (about 10-12 in number)
5. Entire Brahmaputra river stretch from western tip of Majuli (Bhakte Chapori) to Orang
National Park (with the rider that any new area/ landmass created by the river infuture would be the property of the Kaziranga)
6. Bagser RF, Kukrakata RF and the adjoining hills such as Hatimura (may be difficult,as lot of population settled near Silghat)
7. Kalia Bhomora Hills
8. Burachapori and Laokhuwa sanctuaries.
9. Orang National Park.
10. The Eco-sensitive Zones around the Burachapori/ Laokhuwa & Orang National Park
11. All civil areas falling within these boundaries.

13.5

Proposed Master Plan and Zonation Outline

The following areas shall be clearly earmarked and zonation to be carried out
consultation with the stakeholders:
1. Wildlife Core Areas
2. Wildlife Corridor Areas
3. Production Forestry areas
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

afterPage No. 205 of 402

4. Acquired/ remaining Tea garden areas outside the serial 1 to 3 above
5. Habitation and Development areas
6. Highways, Roads and Communication areas
The master Plan shall address each of these issues in great detail.
13.5.1 Land Use Classification
In addition to the applicable land category classification followed by the Revenue
Administration, the following land use classification may be proposed for the landscapeareas:
1. Wildlife Core Areas (including structural Corridors)
2. Open Functional Corridor Areas
3. Open Areas (including Agriculture, public parks etc.)
4. Water Bodies, Reservoirs and Water Channels (for public and wildlife)
5. Residential Areas (Rural, Peri-urban and Urban)
6. Commercial Areas
7. Institutional Areas (Schools, Colleges, Local Clubs etc.)
8. Industrial Areas (permitted Industries only, if any, as per the ESZ Regulation)
9. Tourism Zone
1. Hotels and Eateries
2. Parking Zones
3. Shopping and Commercial Areas
13.5.2 Building Regulation
There shall be a set of guidelines for building construction, color-code, green design andlow carbon foot print. Further, the Master Plan shall mark areas for building zonation suchas:
1. No Building Zone
2. Riased Platform Building Zone
3. 1-3 Story Building Zone
4. Multi Story Building Zone
13.6

Possible Activities to be funded by the Authority

The funds of the Authority among others may have to be also used for the following
purposes:
1. Gap funding for all green structures and development works, which can be termed
as Green Gap Funding to ensure that the landscape area continues to retain low
carbon foot print
2. Subsidization of losses on adoption of low carbon/ organic means of production(especially in the tea garden areas)
3. Model housing and other infrastructure creation for displaced/ disadvantaged
communities wrt providing wider berth to wildlife.
4. Expenditure on alternate means of livelihoods, training and skills building
5. Institution building within the landscape (Quality Education, Recreation, Health andOffice and Commercial Infrastructure)
6. Project Grants to local institutions within the landscape
7. Awareness generation and public campaigns
8. Capacity building and training of local bodies, local youth
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 206 of 402

9. Research and development activities
10. Consulting and expert advisory, Proof of Concept studies etc.
11. Maintenance works
While achieving the above, every effort should be made to take full advantage of all the
on-going schemes of the various Govt agencies at the State and central level. The
following line of action is suggested:
1. Effort should be made, first, in consultation with the concerned Department/ Agency
to modify their part of the scheme as a special consideration to match with theperspective of the Kaziranga landscape.
2. If the above does not work out for certain reasons such as fund constraint, legacy
policy issues, the gap should be identified, and the scheme should be revised within
the local perspective with additional funding from the Authority
3. Only in the areas where there is no intervention currently, and the same is very
essential for the landscape, then, a de-novo scheme should be prepared for
implementation.
4. All such schemes however, should be posed for funding from existing sources tothe extent possible.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 207 of 402

CHAPTER 14
14

Management Strategies

Among the most important anti poaching strategies is to realign the forces, infrastructureand strategies to meet the Mission “Poaching Free Kaziranga”. As already stated in Part Iof the Report, Kaziranga has got quite some infrastructure, and it cannot be denied; andwhen poaching continues to take place despite that then a rethink is must. A brief of theorganizational structure, manpower and associated infrastructure has been described inpart I. The Part II, the Chapter 12 deals with technologies that are required to be adopted
to be successful in stopping poaching altogether. However, it has already been mentionedthat man behind the machine is equally, often more, important that the equipment itself.
This Chapter deals with all aspects of field staff, field formations, capacity building andtraining, staff welfare so that the Mission Poaching Free Kaziranga can be achieved. The
following key areas have been addressed here:1. Organizational Restructuring of DFO, EAWL
2. Realignment of Anti Poaching Camps
3. Roads and Bridges
4. Infrastructure Creation
5. Field Staff Capacity Building and Training
6. Staff Welfare
14.1

Organizational Restructuring

The Eastern Assam Wildlife Division was set up in 1966 and has grown from strength tostrength. This is the Division which must be given the credit of ensuring that kaziranga
could see a century of success in rhinoceros conservation, now a legend in the world.
There have been many a DFO, Range officers, Foresters, Forest Guards, Game
Watchers, mahouts who have contributed to this saga of success. The staff strength has
grown from a few tens to more than 500 numbers. Kaziranga also grew from Reserved
Forest to Game Sanctuary to National Park and now Tiger Reserve status since 1908. If allgoes well, it may well be the first land based Protected Area (discounting Chilika lake) tomove onto a landscape approach. It would not be out of place to mention how the area of
Kaziranga grew over the years. Though it started with 430 sq km during 1908-1914 period,
when the Kaziranga RF was declared and several additions, deletions were applied to it,
but there was no change in its area till 1974 when it was declared a National Park. It isalso little surprising to note that the boundary of the final Kaziranga RF and the National
Park do not match (atleast on the northern part). It is very much possible that when themaps of Kaziranga National Park were drawn in 1974 based on the Survey of India
topographic sheet of 1972, the river Brahmaputra had already devoured almost 40 sq kmof landmass of Kaziranga. Yet, the area shown somehow did not change from the original
430 sq km. By 1985, the area near Burapahar was fully regained from the Brahmaputra
river, and the 1st Addition to Kaziranga was appended with 67 sq km of additional land. In
1990, the Burapahar range was opened to extend protection to the 1 st Addition areas. By
1987, the sanctioned staff strength stood at 532.
The foresight of the then authorities in charge was that they proposed almost to double thearea of the Park to 880 sq km by a series of additions. Unfortunately, most of these
additions did not materialize at all till date. Even though the additional areas officially neverPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 208 of 402

became a part of the Park, certain areas such as the 6 th Addition areas were alreadyhaving substantial rhino movement, and became haven for poachers. The Park authorities
were forced to open camps and move staff (however scanty that was) by opening the 5 thRange called the Northern Range.
If one looks objectively, prior to 1 st Addition, about 532 no of sanctioned strength looked
after 430 sq km, i.e. 0.8 sq km area per staff. Immediately after taking over the 1 st Addition,
the per capita responsibility increased to 0.90 sq km per person. In 2010, when the 6 thAddition areas were started to be looked after, the per capita responsibility increased to1.55 sq km. However, to this, the additional support staff in terms of AFPF, Home Guards
and Casual Workers have not been added. Today the total staff figure stands at about1200 (all strengths put together), bringing the responsibility ratio per staff back to 0.74 sq
km per person. The situation today is somewhat better than what it was in 1987. However,
if one looks at the poaching statistics of late eighties and early nineties, one would find thatrecord number of poaching cases happened. The highest being 48 (a record which is yet
to be broken, thanks to the devotion and sacrifice of the field staff all these years).
Therefore, the period of late eighties and today have a parallel, namely lowest
responsibility ratio and highest number of poaching cases in both the periods.
In order to arrive at the correct picture, another parameter needs to be taken into account.
The staff deployment in Kaziranga does not direct linkage to each person. There is no
direct responsibility given to any staff to look after a certain defined compartment (as is thepractice in most of the states in the country). Here staff is deployed in groups to look after
a given area, and a minimum to 3-4 persons are deployed together. Assuming that on anaverage per anti poaching camp, 3 persons are deployed, one can arrive at the
responsibility ratio in a better way. In 2000, there were 120 camps, in 2005 there were 154
camps and in 2014, as of now there are 174 camps. The total staff strength can beassumed to be 562 for all practical purposes all this while.
The per camp responsibility ratio was 4 sq km in 2000, which became bettered in 2005 to
3 sq km, but got worsened despite adding substantial number of camps, in 2014 to 5 sq
km. This statistics cab also be directly correlated with poaching cases. By 2013 and 2014,
the same number of staff started to be responsible for more areas in 2013 and 2014.
Further, availability of staff per camp was 4.67 in 2000, which got reduced to 3.67 in 2005
and further got reduced to 3.22 in 2014. Now, adding the total strength today of 1200 staff,
we see that per camp staff deployment comes to 6.9, which must be one of the highest so
far. However, this needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, as the fringe camps and sensitive
areas require not less than 7-10 persons to do patrol duty. Further, one needs to keep inmind that after induction of semi automatic weapons in AFPF, of which the strength isabout 200 in Kaziranga, the minimum deployment of staff with these weapons has become
3-5 for sake of security of the arms. With this compulsive grouping of staff deployment,
which cannot be broken down in smaller numbers, the effective deployment has
decreased. For example, 200 semi automatic weapons would require atleast another
deployment of 400-600 personnel just to make a safe unit, meaning, about 600 armed staff
are actually equivalent only to 200 or less of staff in real terms. Therefore, thoughseemingly staff strength has increased from all sources, due to change in deployment
strategy (to safeguard arms from snatching), the effective staff strength today in Kaziranga

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 209 of 402

is not more than 600. This leaves us with only 3.44 equivalent personnel available per
camp.
Another remarkable change in strategy that was effected in 2014 was to erect “Tongi” andwatch towers at vulnerable places. In Burapahar alone 4 new Tongi and 1 watch tower
were made operational, for which it was very difficult to spare staff. Personnel werethinned down from some internal camps and in conjunction with some casual workers andhome guards, these posts are being managed. The effect is that poaching in these areas
have substantially come down.
Another change in strategy during 2014 was to offer sustained resistance to poachers.
Operations against them were continued for several hours stretching to more than 24hours anyway, and often stretching to 3-5 days together on 24X7 basis. This led to
introduction of fatigue among the field staff. If today, we cannot give sufficient strength tohave a flexibility of at least 12 hours deployment (8 hourly deployment does not makemuch sense in jungle warfare) in the field, sustaining anti poaching strikes would become
very difficult to achieve.
There is possibly another way to look at the staff deployment in terms of number of
manpower per capita rhinoceros. We need to take two periods i.e. 1987 when the staff
strength was 532 and 2013 when the staff strength is 562 (and total manpower is 1200).
The rhino population in 1987 can be safely estimated to be at 1020 (given the direct countresults of 1984 and 1991), whereas the population figure for 2013 is 2329. Applying
sanctioned strength criteria, the manpower per capita rhino in 1987 was 0.52, whereas thesame got reduced to 0.24 in 2013, which is little less than half of 1987. [ If one takes total
deployment of staff in 2014, including AFPF etc, which is 1200 in numbers, the ration
would be 0.52, same as in 1987]. The decade of 1970s was, as per available statistics
from 1965, the period of least poaching, with exception of 1971 (when 8 poachingincidents took place). The total poaching during the decade 1970 to 1979 was only 27 withtwo poaching free years. What an achievement, 2.7 poachings per year. The staff strength
was 90 in 1971 which constantly grew to 213 in 1979. The rhino population count for 1972
was 658 and 939 for 1978. The rhino population for 1970 can be easily calculated to 562,
and for 1979 can be kept at 940. Therefore, the manpower to rhino ratio for 1970 comes to
0.16 and for 1979 comes to 0.23. Thus, there does not seem to be any clear indication ofbest possible manpower ratio per rhino from the past management history of the Park.
However, the best manpower ratio was in 1987, which should be maintained also in future.
Since data for armed forces such as AFPF etc. was not available for all the years, thiscomparison has been done only with sanctioned staff strength.
In order to arrive at required staff strengths to manage Kaziranga, the following
parameters can be used:
1. Boundary Conditions:
At the outset, the boundary conditions of possible area and number of rhinos (asECC) needs to be worked out, even though hypothetically. The same is given
below:• Area of the Park/ Tiger Reserve:
Since the existing area of Kaziranga National Park with all its
additions comes to only 884 sq km, it is most unlikely in next few
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 210 of 402

years that this area would cross 1100 sq km north of the NH37.
Therefore, the area for arriving at staff positions should be taken at
1100 sq km•

Ecological Carrying Capacity:
Though Ecological Carrying Capacity (ECC) has not been
calculated, the estimates of the author by indirect methods andfield observation says that it may be taken as 3200. However,assuming 0.40 sq km per rhino space is made available, 3200
rhinos would require 1280 sq km of space. Since in the first point,
possibilities of area, of now seem only 1100 sq km, the ECC of thePark would get reduced to 2750 rhinos. Therefore, for 1100 sq km,
the target population is 2750.

2. Ratio of camps vs area:
With automation and technology introduction, it would possible to monitor effectively
an area of 5 sq km per anti poaching camp with added appendage of one or two
watch towers/ Tongi.
3. Man-power per camp:
In order to perform 24X7 duty on a regular basis, each anti poaching camp needs tohave 8 persons plus one cook, taking the strength to 9.
4. Beats: Each Range must have two to three beats with double the staff strength ofan anti poaching camp for out of the routine duties, supplementing in an operation,and sustaining long duration operations.
5. Range HQ: Each range must have at least a strike force of 15 members wellequipped in respect and well versed in Jungle war fare.
6. Divisional HQ: The Divisional HQ also needs to have at least two strike forces forsurprise duty and sustaining operations against poachers.
7. Support Staff:
In addition to the front line staff, support staff is required such as:• Drivers• Mechanic• Speed Boat/Motor Drivers• Mechanical Equipment Wing and Workshop personnel• Civil, Mechanical and Electrical Engineers• Agriculture and allied sector experts• Electronics & IT Support▪ Electronics and Computer Engineers▪ Electronic equipment trouble shooting▪ Wireless equipment trouble shooting▪ Network Engineer▪ IT support team
▪ Solar panel trouble shooting▪ Systems Analyst/ DB Manager▪ Data Center Support Staff▪ Power back up and Generator Operators• Central Control Room manpower (6 persons)PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 211 of 402

• Control Room manpower (4 in each Range)• GIS expert• Computer Operators• MIS expert
8. Executive Officers:• ACFs• Forest Range Officer• Research Officers• Field Veterinary Officers• Public Prosecutors• Specially trained Investigating Officers for Wildlife crime• HR management• Advocacy and Media Managers
14.1.1 Proposed Staff Strength
Currently the area managed is little less than 880 sq km. The number of anti poaching
camps required for this area comes to 176, which is just two more than what we havecurrently. With 176 camps, the required field staff strength comes to 1689 field staff,
against existing 1200 deployed, leaving a gap of 489. Additionally, there appears to be arequirement of 10 to 15 executive officers.
This can be achieved as below:1. Raise the sanctioned strength of EAWL Division from 562 (last revised in2001) to 1132 by adding 565 additional posts as per break provided below.
2. Carry out recruitment in AFPF to fill the existing vacancies, and deploy
additional armed strength of 150 personnel.
3. Pick up local communities volunteers about 150 (and during flood times
about 250) and organize VDP kind of patrol along NH37 and boundaries of
the Park close to the villages.
4. Raise the Special Tiger Protection Force (two companies)
There could be arguments against such high staff numbers, which are unique for
Kaziranga. One could also argue for withdrawal of staff rather than augmenting the same.
However, it must be kept in mind that Kaziranga now has 5.4 rhinos per sq km. If the staff
were to perform regular protection and management duties alone, it would be a Herculeantask, as animal densities are very high, and staff has necessarily to move in groups of two
to three at a time. As already stated, 7% staff are injured and invalid, and vacancies run toanother 17.3%. To that if one adds leave and absence of about 15%, the actual staff
strength on the ground comes to only 61% of the sanctioned strength. These factors alsoneed to be taken into account while taking any decision. Further, it is to be noted that as of
now there are few camps (almost all the new additions in 2013-14) for which there are no
regular staff available for posting. These are being manned by casual workers and home
guards.
For every 50 sq km area added to the Park/ Tiger Reserve, the manpower strength needs
to be revised, especially wrt FrI, Fgd, Game watcher, Boatman etc. For every 80-120 sq
km addition, the posts of FR, Dy FR, driver, motor boat driver etc. should be upwardly
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 212 of 402

revised; and a new Range should be added with its own anti poaching camps and beats.
The staff strength of EAWL Division has not been revised since 1987/2001. The proposed
sanctioned strength of staff for EAWL for 2014 is given below:

Sl
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

STATEMENT SHOWING CREATION OF POSTS UNDER EAWL BOKAKHAT
Additional Posts
Category of Post
Staff Strength
Total Strength
Proposed
2001
2014
DCF
1
1
FVO
1
1
2
WLRO
1
2
3
ACF
3
6
9
FR
6
6
12
10
10
20
Dy.R/G.Keeper
Forester-I
45
75
120
Forester-II
1975
94
Hd G.Watcher
525
30
Forest Guard
212
150
362
Game Watcher
58
30
88
2
10
12
T.Driver
Driver15
15
30
M.L.Driver
6
8
14
1
10
11
Head Mahut
34
25
59
Mahut
Grass cutter
34
20
54
Boatman63
50
113
Head Asstt1
1
2
Accountant
1
2
3
4
2
6
Sr Asstt
8
12
20
Jr Asstt
St Asstt
1
7
8
Peon
7
5
12
11
5
16
Chowkidar
Mali
3
5
8
Khansama
22
Paniwalla
1
1
Handiman
111
56
Vety F. Asstt1
4
5
Radio Techn
Electrician
1
45
Sweeper
3
5
8
TOTAL
562
570
1132
Cumulative
562
1137

14.1.2 Reorganization of EAWL
There has already been a move to split the EAWL Division into four parts by placing four
divisions in charge of the current territories. However, such a splitting of the existing
territory may not be of any use in achieving anti poaching strategies for the following
reasons:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 213 of 402

1. The Range Officers, especially on the north and the south banks shall havetremendous coordination issues, as they would belong to two/ three different DFOs.
The single command on the ground would break down.
2. Cohesion among the ranges on the north and south is of utmost importance,
breaking of which may see actually rise in poaching.
3. In the current Kaziranga National Park with its 1 to 6 additions, there must be single
command structure, as this is the most vulnerable to poaching and must be under asingle DDO command for effective management of the territory.
Therefore, instead of splitting the EAWL Division in 4 units, the following revised plan issubmitted:1. One ACF each to be placed in charge of the affairs of Bokakhat, Kaliabor andBiswanath Sub Divisions having jurisdiction respectively over Eastern and Central
Range (Bokakhat), Western Range and Burapahar Range (Kaliabor) and Northern
Range (Biswanath).
2. One ACF to be placed in charge of Legal cell and Wildlife crime
3. One ACF in charge of EDCs
4. One ACF in charge of Administration and Logistics
5. Each of the above three ACFs to be assisted by one FR and 2 FrI.
6. Two beats to be created, one each at Kalia Bhomora and Gohpur under a Dy FR.
These posts may be later upgraded to FR.
7. Other supporting staff, as indicated above, can be taken on contract basis or
However, if the Bagser RF is brought into the fold of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, thefollowing strategies are suggested:
1. Create a new Range for Bagser RF which is 33.67 sq km in area, but would need abigger infrastructure and full time dedicated units for its effective anti poaching
management.
2. The Range could look after the entire right side of the NH37 starting from
Jakhlabandha to Deosur and then the hill side behind it.
3. However, the Bagser RF must be sanitized by searching every cave (these caves
are hideout of militants and poachers, and highly impregnable) and neutralizing it.
4. It would require strengths of two platoons of armed guards to to keep it sanitized, in
addition to a large force along the NH37.
5. The biggest advantage of controlling Bagser RF would be that poaching would get
decimated from this part of Kaziranga.
6. Bagser RF would need three major camps on its east, centre and west with one
platoon in each, in addition to a platoon for the NH37 stretch. These must be set up
on vantage points along the ridge line, and well equipped night vision devices andthermal scanners.
Strengthening of the Range Offices:
The range offices need to be strengthened. It is, therefore, proposed, to add the following
manpower at RO level in Kaziranga:
1. 2 Nos range assistants / Jr Asstt to be posted per range
2. 2 Dy RO at HQ
3. One record keeper/ Statistical assistant
4. 1 Control Room Operator and one Computer Operator
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 214 of 402

14.1.3 Vacancies in AFPF
There are two battalions of the AFPF who are providing commendable service to thecause of protection of the forests and wildlife. Maximum staff strength from the twobattalions is deployed at Kaziranga. However, there is requirement of more AFPF
personnel.
Currently, there are several vacancies in the two battalions. The vacancy position of the 1 st
battalion is as below:
1. II I/C
1
2. Asstt Commandant 4
3. AB Inspector
6
4. Havildar
42
5. Naik6
6. Lance Naik
6
7. Constable88
8. Driver Constable
11
9. Gr IV
15
Similarly, the vacancy position in 2nd battalion is as below:
1. Inspector
9
2. ASI22
3. Havildar
164
4. Constable29
It is also to be noted that promotions in the rank are due for a long time. Assuming that
promotions would be effected soon in near future, the actual vacancies at constable level
would be more than that indicated above. Adding the vacancies of havildar, naik and lancenaik of both the battalions, to that of the constables of both the battalions, the total
vacancy at constable level comes to 335.
Therefore, there is an immediate requirement of recruitment of 335 constables in theforces. It is proposed that atleast 150 of the new recruits could be posted in Kaziranga.
14.2

Realignment of Anti Poaching Camps

As can be seen from the calculations from the previous paragraphs, the number of camps
required to administer the existing areas of the Park (and not the Tiger Reserve) comes to176. We have already 174 camps. However, looking at the geography, the followin
additional camps are suggested:1. Bhumoraguri APC under NR
2. Ghahigaon (Gohpur) APC under NR
3. Melbazar APC under NR
4. Silghat Riverside APC under BP
5. Hatimura APC under BP
6. Kaliabhomora APC under BP
7. Rohita Chapori APC under BHQ
However, it is seen that against 5 sq km area per camp, there are camps where its morethan 10 sq km and even there are camps where it is less than 5 sq km. Still then, what is
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 215 of 402

lacking is camp to camp visibility, access, patrolling paths, clear demarcation of lines of
responsibility. Realigning all the camps de-novo can be a very big challenge, and may
pose disruption of patrolling and anti poaching activities.
Therefore, the following strategies are suggested for making effective use of the anti
poaching camps:
1. A sensitivity map of the Tiger Reserve to be prepared, which needs to be updated atregular intervals.
2. Based on historical knowledge, all pathways which have been used in past bypoachers to be identified and mapped.
3. Based on the current locations of the camps, gaps should be identified, if any.
4. All camps which are in dilapidated condition should be reconstructed afresh basedon well thought strategy keeping in mind gaps, sensitivity, out-reach.
5. Each new site of a camp should have maximum visibility all around.
6. No new camp should be constructed unless its strategic requirement is high or it fills
a gap.
7. A Camp map should be prepared for each camp showing the next camp locations inall directions around this camp with
8. One anti poaching camp in each Range needs to be identified as “In House Training
Camp” with infrastructure for accommodating at least 20 trainees, two faculty, amain training hall with all equipment and two break out rooms. For example
Rangamatia in Eastern Range, Holalpath in Central Range, Difaloomukh in Western
Range are good candidates for such activities.
9. These camp sites shall have additional barracks for the strike force as required.
10. At least one more camp should be developed with additional infrastructure to house
strike forces.
11. All the camps on the border (either northern side or southern side) shall beidentified as “Border camp”, and shall be so designated.
12. Each of these border camps shall implement two lines of defence: firstly, how tostop trespassers right at the border, and secondly, the second line of defence whicha trespasser should not be able to cross.
13. All such lines of defence should be clearly demarcated on map for each of thesecamps based on ground configuration, terrain, water bodies and vegetation.
14. Based on the line of defence and ground strategy, each of the border camps shallbe equipped with adequate and appropriate technology to detect trespass.
15. Direct lines of sight would be established, in all feasible areas, by setting up watch
towers/ Tongi atleast 20/30 ft high. Such towers would be managed 24X7, eachwith atleast two staff to ensure that no trespass happens.
16. The strategy could be a mix of towers/ equipment based on ground feasibility
conditions.
17. Behind the border camps, a line of inner camps would be identified who would seethat in case the 2nd line of defence is breached, trespassers are not allowed to crossbeyond the third line, which shall be maintained, wherever possible, by the inner
camps.
18. Each camp may operate a set of remote camera traps, motion sensors, night vision
devices and thermal scanners, depending upon terrain and need.
19. Atleast two camps shall be identified and designated as “Beats” in each Range.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 216 of 402

14.2.1 Additional Role & Responsibilities of Range HQ and Beats
In addition to the duties of protection, the Range HQ and Beats shall have the following
functions:1. To ensure that ration has reached each camp
2. To ensure that all consumables have reached designated camp
3. To ensure that all equipment are functional and in working condition
4. To ensure that weaponry is in working condition, and all precautions and formalities
in case of fire arms are strictly observed
5. To ensure that camp diaries are being filled up regularly
6. To ensure that no staff leaves camp without valid authority
7. If there are perimeter security systems installed, the control view shall be provided
to the Beats and Range HQ. They shall have to take immediate action in case ofany suspicious activity.
8. Electronic Eye (EE) feed shall be provided to the Range HQ/ Beats who shallmonitor their EE towers closely on 24X7 basis for any possible trespass.
9. Field level MIS/ GIS shall be fed from the Beats and Range HQ
14.2.2 Additional Incentives to Personnel Posted in Wildlife Areas
For the personnel posted in the wildlife areas, especially the rhino bearing areas face themaximum risk to life, chances of bodily injury and disease are very high, 24X7 alertness,duty in very hostile condition, night patrolling in highly hostile conditions, no saturdays andsundays, no holidays and no festivals, to perform duty by being away from family andchildren and maintain dual establishments. In Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, the job iscomparable to that of the Indian Army in hostile conditions, but limited or no facilities.
There are few hazardous jobs in the Government of Assam compared to a posting in
Kaziranga National Park. However, the current amenities are basic minimum. The
following welfare measures are suggested to be implemented:1. Every personnel posted in wildlife area should be given the next higher pay scale
for the duration of his posting in wildlife.
2. 30% of Basic pay to be paid extra for all in rhino bearing areas, and 15% in otherwildlife areas.
3. Complete Accident-cum-Death benefit for Rs. 5.00 lakh for each employee, frombottom to top
4. Cashless Medical treatment facility for the front-line staff worth Rs. 5.00 lakh
annually.
5. Free ration for all
6. The present ration allowance of Rs. 500 per month to be converted into a monthly
incentive as Rhino Bearing Areas Allowance; and should be in addition to the Tiger
Allowance.
7. Clean and potable drinking water to be provided in all camps/tongies
8. Annual free medical check up to be made compulsory
9. One Week/ two weeks allowed with family (on rotation basis), all paid expenses forfamily members (Spouse/ two children/ dependent sister/ dependent parents) tovisit the Grooming center and stay together and messing allowed for all.
10. The above would apply equally to the AFPF personnel posted as well.
11. There shall be no discrimination between the staff posted in the camps in terms ofamenities and welfare, so that duty become the primary focus of all.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 217 of 402

14.2.3 Family Welfare Measures
The following family welfare measures are suggested for the staff of Kaziranga:
1. Cashless Medical treatment facility for the family members together worth Rs. 5.00
lakh annually.
2. Annual compulsory medical check up of family members
3. School education fee for the children of field staff to be exempted.
4. Annual grant for books.
5. Scholarships to be awarded for deserving and meritorious students till graduation/
post graduation
6. In case of unfortunate death of any staff while on duty/patrolling/shoot-out, suitablejob to the spouse as per educational qualification to be provided.
14.2.4 Vehicles
The following additional infrastructure is proposed under vehicles:
1. Stealth Vehicles 2 per range
2. Mobile Communication vehicles 1 per range
3. Motor bikes 10 per range
4. Highway Patrol – 4 vehicles per range
5. Rescue van – 1 per range
6. Mini truck – 2 per range
14.2.5 River Patrol
For strengthening river vigil and to stop poachers from entering from the North Bank, thefollowing strategies are suggested:
1. The Brahmaputra river shall be mapped immediately after the floods every year
2. The mapping methodology could be UAV/ Quadcopter/ Helicopter based pay load
3. An analysis of areas lost and gained would be carried based on the airreconnaissance.
4. Doppler sounding of the river channel shall be done after the floods.
5. Maps would be prepared for river patrol showing possible navigation pathways
6. Lines of defence (first and second) would be drawn on map with possible patrolling
combinations to ensure that no trespasser can cross the river by boat or otherwise
7. Each floating camp and patrol boat/ speed boat shall be equipped equipment suchas night vision devices, thermal scanners (long distance scanners as well),binoculars etc. for easy monitoring of the river lines.
8. River patrol shall be in constant touch with the nearest border camps.
9. As a long term measure it is proposed to erect a series of permanent watch towers
in the river Brahmaputra to create a line of defence. Each tower may cost about Rs.
1-3 crore depending upon platform width and utility.
Infrastructure under river patrol is proposed as below:
1. Floating camps additional 2 more
2. Vehicle launch additional 2 nos
3. Speed boats 4 per range
4. Rubber boats 2 per range
5. Mechanized boat one per range
6. country boats 3 per camp
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 218 of 402

14.2.6 Dog Squad
It is proposed to have at least 3-4 Dog Squad and K-9 units placed at strategic locations
for quick reaction. Two units are in the process of being raised at 2 nd AFPF HQ.
14.3

Roads and Bridges

As already described at several places, Kaziranga is criss-crossed by several streams andwater bodies, making straight and rectangular grid planning impossible in the Park. This
also increases the time to reach a spot in the crisis time. To this woe can be safely added
the lack of adequate number of all weather bridges, because of which communication gets
disrupted during the rainy season. As the water from Brahmaputra river inundates various
channels in the Park, communication gets cuts off for the rest of the rainy season and insome cases where channels are deep, much beyond the winter season as well.
The roads play dual role, firstly by allowing communication and secondly by acting as
highlands during floods. However, it has been noticed that all roads constructed against
current have resulted in siltation of water bodies. As roads are essential for north-south
movement, certain amount of siltation cannot be avoided. However, further expansion ofroad network in low lying areas needs to be avoided, or if the road is very essential, longspan columnless bridges must be made part of the scheme. It is possible to achieve about
90-100 m span of such structures without any intervening columns in between allowing
free movement of water underneath.
It is also essential to adopt a strategy of converting ecologically well aligned road sections
into major highlands by raising their height and increasing the width. This would give
shelter to the animals during flood. NH37 is an excellent highland, but highly disturbed bymoving vehicles.
Therefore, the most critical part of the communication are the means of keeping
communication open across the flooded channels. As already stated earlier, interventions
against the direction of current cause siltation and may not be prescribed against flow ofwater in main water bodies. Therefore, successful communication for all weathers can beachieved only by using This can be achieved by using technologies such as suspension
bridges, bailey bridge and causeway (in small streams and channels).
As a short and medium term measure, it is proposed to undertake the following works:
1. Convert at least 20 km of road segments into highlands by doubling their width andincreasing the height suitably.
2. Building 6 nos of baily bridges such as one at Holalpath over major rivers in th Park.
3. Build 10 nos of suspension bridges upto 100 m span in critical water body habitats
4. Build 20 bridges of 30 m or less span
5. Construct about 100 causeways with very good foundations in various streams witha dual purpose to cross the stream and also hold water in the stream once thefloods recede. This would help in overcoming water crisis in the park/ Tiger
Reserve.
6. Number of the causeways, if successful, should be increased in order to hold waterat different levels and also to allow passage.
7. One all weather road behind Kukrakata RF from Baneswar to Difaloo
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 219 of 402

8. All central paths to be connected with one another
9. From Burapahar to Agoratoli at least one all weather road
The proposed infrastructure would ensure that areas of the Park/ Tiger Reserve do not get
disconnected during floods.
14.4

Key Infrastructure

Though not directly linked with anti poaching, there are certain infrastructure and facilities
required in Kaziranga for better management and long term conservation of wildlife. Someof the proposed activities under this head are:1. State of the art Veterinary Hospital:
One state of the art veterinary hospital is required at Kaziranga with specializationin wildlife and especially large mammals such as rhinoceros and elephants. The
CWRC situated Borjuri is acting as a rescue center with a good team of doctors andexperts. However, it lacks equipment and infrastructure. As there is sufficient land at
barjuri, the CWRC should be expanded with more doctors, equipment andlaboratory. The post mortem protocol for wildlife needs to be strengthened, and alltest facilities for vicera etc. should be made available locally so that prompt results
can be obtained.
Since there is a large cattle population surrounding the Kazitranga Tiger Reserve,
veterinary units are also required at few more places so that cattle immunization,and cattle improvement programmes can be implemented in the fringe villages.
2. Hospital at Kohora:
There is no hospital or good medical facility on the southern side of the Tiger
Reserve. There is requirement of at least one good hospital. This could be done in
Govt. or joint sector. Further, there must be first aid units in all Range HQ and Beatsand the staff should be trained in administering first aid.
3. State of the Art Strong Room:
Kaziranga requires There is one strong room at Kohora where collected rhino horns
are kept. This infrastructure is very poor with no modern facilities/ access control
and security systems. The storage is also in old fashioned manner and highly
unscientific. There must be a modern strong room with physical/ electronic security
along with temperature and humidity controlled conditions.
4. Kaziranga Mini Data Center:
The Kaziranga Tiger Reserve (and the proposed Authority) would be generating a
lot of data from so many sensors, electronic eye, camera traps, AWS etc. These
would be required not only to be stored but also archived, retrieved and analysed in
Big Data streams, as the chunks making the data would very diverse, varied andnumerous ranging from text strings, number strings, text and image files, video andCSV file to mention a few that would be generated from hundreds of systems/
sensors working on 24X7 basis. Therefore, it is proposed to have a Mini Data
Center at Kaziranga either at Kohora or Bokakhat. This is proposed to beconnected with the State Data Center (SDC) of the IT Department, Govt. of AssamPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 220 of 402

at Dispur. The Kaziranga MDC (KMDC) would be full fledged Tier II+ data centerwith complete physical and electronic access control, connectivity and power backup for (seven) days. The Data Center would be housed in a three storey building
structure fully compliant with Seismic Zone V Building Code. The Strong room canbe housed in the second floor of this building, with ground floor for total physicalsecurity control, reception and building management, fire control etc. The schematicof the KMDC is shown in Part III of the Report.
5. Modern Infrastructure in the Range Offices
Though Kaziranga handles more than one lakh tourists annually (during the six
months of the tourists season), none of the four range offices in the south side
namely Eastern Range, Central Range, Western Range and Burapahar Range arein any condition to provide adequate and satisfactory services. These offices werebuilt even before the period when tourism pressure was as less as 10000 visitors oreven less than that. The volume of visitors have increased more than 10 times, but
the range office infrastructure has remained the same. This often leads toharassment of the tourists who come from far distances. Problems are faced also
very seriously in case of foreign tourists who find the amenities highly lacking, given
the world wide fame of Kaziranga. Further, there are no modern Banking, ATM andpayment facilities through Debit card/ Credit card etc. In view of the above, it is
proposed to build modern office structures for the four range offices on the south
side. The design shall incorporate adequate office spaces, strong rooms with safe
for cash and other valuables, armory, cells, interrogation rooms, conference rooms,
public facilitation centres, control rooms, wireless and communication room,computer and EDP cell, EDC facilitation center etc.
6. Interpretation Centre
The Interpretation Centre at Mihimukh was built during the centenary celebrations in2005 at Mihimukh. However, its a small center which cannot accommodate large
number of visitors. It is proposed to set up an upgraded version in a new building
showcasing the wildlife, interactive lights and sounds of Kaziranga, diorama
displays, tableaux depicting life of rhinos. It is proposed that this Centre may be
named after P.N. Lahan, the first Director of the Park who primarily shaped theexisting management strategies of Kaziranga.
7. Upgradation of K.C.C.C.
The Kaziranga celebrated its 100 years of successful conservation history in 2005.
A new convention centre called Kaziranga Centenary Convention Center (KCCC)
was built on the open grounds below the Kaziranga Range Office at Kohora. It hasa big field in the front, and it houses one big conference hall in theater mode, asmall seminar hall, and a reception room with a small hall. The centre is run by the
Kaziranga National Park Staff Welfare Society. The KCCC is badly in need ofrepairs and renovation. It is proposed that the three halls be converted into
international class convention centre. The main hall can be named after Lady
Curzon, whose far-sightedness and vision brought Kaziranga into existence andsaved the rhinos from extinction. The second hall could be named after Mihi
Chandra Miri, the Imperial Forest Service officer from Assam. The third hall could be
named after E.P. Gee who brought Kaziranga on the world map. The sitting room
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 221 of 402

could be named after Balaram Hazarika, who accompanied lady Curzon during her
visit to Kaziranga and entreated her for conserving rhinos. The reception area could
be named after A.J.W Milroy who opened the Park for visitors in 1938.
8. IMAX Theatre and 3D Films on Kaziranga
Tourism in Kaziranga lasts only from November to mid May. However, requests
from tourists come pouring even after that. Currently there are no off-season
activities for the tourists. Additionally, the tourists have not much activity during
evening times. In order to promote tourism during off season months and also togive a very good visiting experience of Kaziranga wildlife thrill, it is proposed tohave a digital 3D/ IMAX Theatre at Kohora. 3D IMAX is a large format cinema with
70mm X 48.5mm film. The average screen size is 60 ft x 80 ft. There are at present
six IMAX theatres in India namely at Mumbai (big Cinemas), Chennai (Luxe IMAX
and Palazzo IMAX), Ahmedabad (Gujarat Science City IMAX 3D), Hyderabad(Prasad's IMAX Theatre with largest 3D screen in the world 72 ft x 90 ft) andBengaluru (PVR IMAX). It requires special camera for shooting of 3D films. The 3D
theatre would provide visitors with thrilling adventure of feeling proximity with therhinoceros, elephants, tigers and birds, among other animals. In order to see athree-dimensional image on screen, two separate images are also required. The 3D
projector simultaneously projects two strips film, one for each eye, onto a special
silver 3D screen. Each strip of film contains images from two slightly different
vantages. The audience must wear special 3D glasses, which channel the right-eye
image to the right eye and the left-eye image to the left eye. The brain fuses the two
images together to create a three-dimensional image. The results make the screen
virtually disappear and the images seem to float around the theatre. Another option
which is more cost effective is the Dolby 3D technology. The Dolby 3D is a big draw
with children and adults alike.
9. Staff Grooming Cum Recreation Center:
The Kaziranga field staff along with the officials Forest Ranger and above are all sovery tied up with carrying out protection duties with sincerity and diligence. The staff
are mostly separated from their spouse and children for long periods, and are notable to share moments of joy and sorrow many a times. Mostly during importantfestivals, they have to abstain from joining their family members due to pressing
protection duties and a great feeling of comradeship. There are also no recreational
opportunities such as news paper, television or games for the front line staff, year
after year. This results in severe isolation, introvertness, desolation, sickness andfeeling of aloofness leading to frustration. There is also no place, such as they havein Army or Police Mess where all can meet and share their joy, sorrow and grief.
There is a great need to dissolve such ill feelings and make all the frontline staff feelthat the Park/ Tiger Reserve management thinks for welfare of themselves and their
loved ones. It is proposed to establish a central Staff Grooming Cum Recreation
Centre at Kohora/ Bagori where 15-20 staff can be regularly brought out from field
and allowed to spend a week or fortnight with their comrades and families. The
Centre shall have all infrastructure for messing, dining hall, library, indoor sports
living rooms. Once built, the center could be run by the Kaziranga National Park
Staff Welfare Society.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 222 of 402

10. Pilkhanas:
It is for the better management of the domestic elephants owned by the Park, a wellstructured Pilkhana (a local apbhransa of the original Urdu word-”Philkhana”,
meaning a place where elephants are kept and tendered. Pilwan is another word formahout- the driver of the elephant). The Pikhana at Mihimukh would be large andspacious to be able to accommodate atleast 20 elephants in a go who can be caredand fed at the same time together. Another, smaller in size, Pilkhana is proposed to
be built at Bagori.
11. Upgradation of the CWRC
To address the welfare needs of the wildlife in and around Kaziranga, especiallyduring floods, the Center for Wildlife rehabilitation and conservation (CWRC) wasestablished in 2002 for attending and executing rescue and subsequent
rehabilitation activities for wildlife in Assam. CWRC is a joint initiative of Assam
Forest Department, Wildlife Trust of India and International Fund for Animal Welfare(IFAW). CWRC and its Mobile Veterinary Service (MVS) units attached to the centre
has so far handled 3490 cases (till February 2014) in Assam and around 60% ofthem have been released back to the wild. CWRC’s animal release percentage isbetter than many other such facilities around the world. Over the years, CWRC has
been successfully hand raised many orphan animals including elephant calves,rhino calves, tiger cubs, leopard cubs etc. and rehabilitate them back in the wild
where the serve the biggest conservation benefit. CWRC is recognised by Central
Zoo Authority (CZA) and is considered as a unique facility of rescue andrehabilitation in the country now. CWRC has formulated protocols for long term
rehabilitation of species like Asian Elephants, Greater One Horned Rhinoceros,
Clouded Leopards, Hoolock Gibbon over the last 10 years and more. CWRC is run
by the donations mainly from individual donors. WTI-IFAW partnership has put
some tireless efforts to gather the funding requirements to run the facility. The
current annual budget of CWRC is about 90 lakhs. CWRC has not got any
Government fund except 20 odd lakhs in 2001 to start the construction and land in
Panbari. The Centre required further upgradation with improved and some new
infrastructure so that the services offered by it can continue to benefit the cause of
wildlife rehabilitation. It is now proposed to add the following support to the Centre:
1
2
3
4
5
6

7

PIL 66/2012

Interpretation cum training centre andlandscaping activities
Leopard enclosure
Primate rehab enclosure
Bird rehab enclosure
Large animal nursery
A working laboratory for diagnostic andresearch purpose of the various wildlife diseaseetc
An annual grant to run the facility

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 223 of 402

12. Upgradation of 2nd AFPF HQ Infrastructure
The 2nd AFPF HQ at Seconee has turned out to be a very good advantage point for
Kaziranga. It is also doubling as HQ for the Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force underthe Afddl D.G. (P), STF. The Seconee HQ is also acting as training hub for the frontline staff. Therefore, its is proposed that the current infrastructure at Seconee be
upgraded to include a Guest House, a training block, a trainees mess, an Officers'
Mess, a small firing range (if possible, by acquiring more land). The existing wallshould be raised further high, and sentry posts should be built. There should be aweapon repairs workshop required inside for repairing all range of weapons.
13. Intranet based Video Conferencing System
The 45 meters towers of the Electronic Eye project would prove to be very
beneficial to the Park/ Tiger Reserve in terms of infrastructure. It would provide arobust 300 Mbps Intranet spread over 9 towers. This would be relayed further downusing several 30 m towers, two of which have already been built. It is expected thata good network would be established in the Tiger Reserve, with the completion of
the Electronic Eye and the Smart Communications Project. It is proposed to run an
Intranet based video conference system with all the camps for effective
management of the Park/Tiger Reserve.
14. Satellite Based Monitoring
The Kaziranga Tiger Reserve requires constant monitoring of the landscape,including the Brahmaputra river. However due to cloudy weather most of the time, it
is not possible to get good satellite images at frequent intervals (or at ;least twice ina year). It is proposed to develop hyper spectral capabilities so that hyper spectral
analysis can be used to get the terrain information on a regular basis. This is very
important from the point of monitoring the Brahmaputra river, floods and erosion,and also constantly updating the terrain model of Kaziranga.
15. Flood Management and Disaster Management Control Room
Each range must be equipped with disaster management infrastructure such as
control room, rescue vehicles, early warning systems (floods/ wind/ epidemics etc.),
quarantine, relief and rehabilitation, first aid infrastructure.
16. Extension of the Management Practices to the Landscape
If the landscape comes into existence, and the aim would be to secure the entire
landscape so that the rhinos can roam around freely without any fear of being
poached, chased or harmed in any way, then the strategies of management
suggested in this Chapter would have to be translated in medium and long term
over the entire Kaziranga Tiger Reserve and the Landscape for which adequate
financial provisions should be made.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 224 of 402

CHAPTER 15
15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
This Chapter explores the possible strategies for development within the Kaziranga
landscape. When we talk of Kaziranga, there are several stakeholders, a snapshot of
which is given briefly in Chapter 8 (Part I) of the Report. This chapter is exclusively
devoted to the local population residing within the Kaziranga landscape. Though statedvariously in Chapters 4 and 13, for sake of reiteration, it needs to be mentioned here thatthe local inhabitants of Kaziranga deserve a special mention as a stakeholders, as theirlives are intimately connected with the Park/ Tiger Reserve. The 'No Development
Constraints” of Kaziranga such as the “Eco-Sensitive Zone”, “No-Development Zone”, andthe proposed Regulatory premises of the KLCDA would leave little options for economic
growth and development of the region in the commonly understood sense of the word
economic development. If the growth path of the people residing within the landscape is
not taken care of, conservation of the rhinos would gradually become a tougher task, andwould be rendered impossible at some point of time in future when the competition for landand other resources become very fierce.
We must recognize for a person living within the landscape, when compared to a person
living outside Kaziranga, the constraints of growth and development are so many that hemay never be able to come out of abject poverty and think of leading a normal economic
life. The economic opportunities before him would continue to be so very limiting that atsome point of time, his love for the rhinos and Kaziragna may be gotten better of by thedesire to be economically prosperous. Such a conversion of heart is highly undesirable.
This Chapter explores the possibilities of a new path of economic growth for thelandscape, where the citizen within the landscape has access to the better health,hygiene, education, employment, business and growth opportunities as comparedsomeone outside the landscape. The path chosen is that of green growth which initiallymay not be cost effective, but would, in the long run not only provide the best environs forthe inhabitants of the landscape, but also give better opportunities for conservation of
wildlife. However, as a society, we the other stakeholders, outside the landscape, must
recognize the constraints of the people within and reach out to them in a positive manner.
The proposed Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework (KLGGF) is a set ofloosely connected policies, technologies either established or emerging, and an approachof implementation taking the local stakeholders in confidence. No attempt has been madeto work out either the policies or technologies in any great detail, as the same would be outof scope of this Report. However, the proposed Authority is expected to take theframework as the guiding principle and develop the policies for implementation, show the
Proof of Concept (PoC) of the new technologies, and through an iterative and consultative
process start implementation/ replication, with a continuous evaluation and impact
analysis. The Framework would, in course of time, lead to evolution of a set of policies,
principles, methods and technologies that would have been used and tested and would
mature for replication elsewhere in the State or the country. As has already been stated,
towards the end of Chapter 13, every development project that is intended within the
Kaziranga landscape by any Department of the Govt. of India or the State Government
must pass through the scanner of the KLGGF, and if any thing lacking is found in it, thatPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 225 of 402

must be very liberally retrofitted so that revisited scheme is good enough to pass throughthe “Green Channel” of the Framework.
15.1

What This Framework is Not About?

Several concepts have evolved in the recent and not so recent past that point towards
green growth strategies, their evaluation and measure. Notable among them are
Enjoyment of Life by Nicholas Gerogescu-Roegen Payment of Ecosystem Services by
Costanza and Daly, Polluters Pay Principle, Green GDP etc. However, the Frameworkpresented in this Chapter, though draws elements from these concepts somewhere lightly
and somewhere heavily, yet it should not be seen as emulation of any particular school ofthought.
This framework is not about Payment of Ecosystem Services. Ecosystem services, asconceptualized by Costanza and Daly [1992] are about human derivable benefits from theecosystems. If the service offered by the ecosystem exist regardless of whether humans
exist or not, then it is not considered an ecosystem service [Costanza et al, 2011]. What allservices Kaziranga may offer, but if the humans do not take benefit from it by way of
manipulating the natural capital by combining with other forms of capital that require
human intervention to build and maintain, then it is no ecosystem service. This Report by
no means relies on the valuation of any of the ecosystem services offered by the
Kaziranga National Park or the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. However, it must be mentionedthat the NTCA has already listed KTR as one of the first few tiger reserves in the country
for which the ecosystem services evaluation exercise is going on with the help of IIFM,
Bhopal.
The framework is also not entirely based on “Polluters Pay Principle”, at least at this stage.
The future levies and incomes of the Authority may depend upon how the low carbon
growth model has been implemented. For example, if the authority is able to achieve asustainable low carbon transport system within the landscape, every new entrant which isa high carbon system may have to pay heavily to enter into the landscape. Such a foreign
body within the landscape may have to cough up fines in hours (to be reduced to minutes
later) of time spent within the landscape.
The proposed framework is not entirely Integrated Conservation and Development Project(ICDP) model. Though the two words namely conservation and development are verymuch a part of it, there are some fundamental differences between the two. The Kaziranga
Conservation and Development model is not based on “Use It or Lose It” principle. Unlike
biodiversity conservation programmes, there are no directly derivable goods and services
from the Park/ Tiger Reserve (unless the rhino trade is legalized, in which case the use it
or lose it principle becomes highly applicable). Secondly, it is not entirely compensation
based approach for the benefits forgone by the local communities due to the protected
area. Kaziranga and the one horned rhinoceros are an integral part of the larger culturalethos of the Assamese society. In that sense, the local communities and the local
stakeholders (including the front line staff) are actually the sentinels of this great cultural
heritage. Therefore, in case of Kaziranga, the stakes are much bigger than the normalcompensation that one would think of in case of an ABC protected area. Implementors of
ICDP have often been charged for not having a comprehensive governance model andinter-disciplinary approach. On the contrary, the Kaziranga model is about governance and
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 226 of 402

multi-disciplinary approach. The similarities between the two models chiefly are alternate
agriculture and livelihoods and enhancement of the value of the landscape. It also includes
the concepts of eco-development and eco-tourism as an integral part of the framework.
This is also in compliance with the NTCA guidelines issued on tourism in Tiger Reserves.
15.2

The Basic Principles of the Green Growth Framework

The principles of development adopted in this Report are meant for a small scale
application, and may prove ideal for experimentation within a landscape of 2000-3000 sq
km with well defined constraints imposed by geography and the ecosystems within thelandscape unit.
The identified constraints in Kaziranga landscape are:
1. A sanctum sanctorum of about 1200-1500 sq km of Kaziranga and its
neighbourhood inviolate habitat of the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros
2. Biotic activities of mining and logging in the upper reaches of the watershed would
induce severe erosion and flash flooding in the 4 th to 6th order streams, leading to
disturbances downstream in the river system.
3. River Brahmaputra is a life giver as well as threat to Kaziranga
4. There is only 235 sq km of plain land available between the hills on the south and
the Kaziranga National Park for any developmental activities including the corridor
areas end to end.
5. About 34 sq km of structural corridor area is inviolate in all respect.
6. About 60 sq km of functional corridor area has to be maintained necessarily as
agricultural or agro-pastoral land use.
7. A 500 meter buffer is required to be maintained between the population and thePark/ Tiger Reserve at identified places
8. The NH37 passing through the landscape needs to be managed with well planned
zonation and land use on either side of it.
9. Overlapping constraints imposed by the No Development Zone
10. Overlapping constraints imposed by the Eco-sensitive Zone around the Kaziranga
Tiger Reserve and other protected areas within and surrounding the landscape.
11. Major part of the watershed in the landscape falls in the 6 th Schedule area.
These geographic and ecosystem constraints have direct bearing on development
strategies to be adopted, as the people living within the landscape are subject to suchforces of nature that may not be visible elsewhere. A cross-section of population may also
be subjected to displacement or loss of property for the requirements of conservationneeds of future. Therefore, compensation is not a correct word to be used in this context,
as the landscape imposes additionally certain socio economic constraints as well. A
person cannot just cannot establish an economic venture or come up with a scheme on his
own, as the “No Development Zone”, “Eco-Sensitive Zone”, or Kaziranga landscapezonation restrictions would apply and affect most of his economic activities. Therefore, theperson living within these constraints belongs to a special class with reduced opportunities
and hence, must be treated exclusively and suitably so that he is equally, nay, better
placed than any one else outside the landscape. This is the basic philosophy on which therecommendations of this Chapter are based upon.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 227 of 402

Keeping the constraints in mind, the basic principles on which the green growth frameworkhas been worked out are as below:
1. Respect and admiration for wildlife and recognition of growth and development
needs of the fringe population
2. Green economy should be the mantra
3. Low carbon development should be the key formula
4. Renewable sources of energy should be used extensively
5. Organic Agriculture should be promoted
6. Low impact buildings alone should be constructed
7. Ecological Footprint of a building should be as small as possible
8. Transportation should be green and futuristic, including the road infrastructure
9. A better mechanism for stakeholder consultations
These basic tenets are explained in some detail in the ensuing paragraphs with examples
and some of the best practices followed elsewhere in the world. These are a mix ofpolicies, principles and technologies. However, no attempt has been made to separate
them at this stage. Some of the policies may find place again in the next Chapter.
15.2.1 Respect and Admiration for Wildlife
The basic guiding principle is that the people of the areas surrounding Kaziranga havedeep love and respect for the wildlife, and have sacrificed whatever they could, in the past,
for conservation of the Greater One Horned Rhinoceros which is their pride. The people
take pride that visitors come from all corners of the world to see the famed rhinoceros of
Kaziranga that thrives so well in their backyard. The local people are the true custodians of
this great heritage that Assam possesses. The local populations have been providing
unconditional support to the forest personnel, barring a handful of miscreants andcriminally minded persons, in discharging their duties for protection of the rhinoceros. This
love and respect for wildlife must be passed on from generation to generation so that man
and rhino can coexist together till eternity [or till climate change induced phenomena do
not get better of us]. The people in the past have sacrificed most of their land for sake ofconservation of the rhino without getting much in return, other than “compensation” for theland lost. The respect and admiration for wildlife today is on the anvil of test, as on one
hand reduced growth opportunities in the surroundings of Kaziranga are fast becoming
stark realities, and on the other hand even opportunities for communication such as the
NH37 are in the danger of being lost. In the wake of “No Development Zone”, “EcoSensitive Zone” and other restrictions that are already inforce, and more likely to be
imposed, the local people are living in fear and uncertainty of their future prospects ofgrowth and development. The foundations of love and respect for the rhinoceros andKaziranga are on shaky grounds today. If the love for rhino gets mired in the tentacles of
economic growth, conserving the species in the long run would become very challenging.
However, economic growth and development, a glimpse of which can be seen all aroundKaziranga today, appears like an ugly monster raring to engulf Kaziranga in few decades
from now. Therefore, such unsustainable growth and development needs to be demystified
to the people. It must be clearly spelt out and well understood by all, including the local
residents, that what we see around Kaziranga today is no growth, and cannot be eventermed development. If this be development, its better we go back to the stone age. If thisdevelopment, then there is something grossly wrong with ourselves, our planners andPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 228 of 402

economists, and the people on the fringe of Kaziranga. If this is development, then our
aspirations, policies and priorities are misplaced. The development around Kaziranga
cannot be allowed to be let lose like a neoclassical economics monster. Kaziranga needs adifferent perspective, a different design board and scientific planning, whatever be the costof it. The only question is – are we prepared to pay? The people around Kaziranga need tounderstand very well that it is time a new approach is adopted, it is time that we look backand realize “Are we doing any good to ourselves, our future progeny and to Kaziranga?”.
The dilemma of Kaziranga today, would be problem of all humanity tomorrow. So, it is in
the interest of all stakeholders that new scientific experiments must begin here and now.
15.2.2 Green Economy
The aim of this chapter is not to initiate a debate on “Whither Economics?” or on the merits
and demerits of “Homo Economicus” as variously defined by John Stuart Mill or Adam
Smith, or give a detailed picture of the neoclassical economists and theorists and theirsystematic demolition (though not complete as yet) and emergence of Environmental
Economics, Ecological Economics, Resource Economics or Green Economics. The aim of
this Chapter is also not to elucidate the finer nuances and differences of these emerging or
already emerged branches of knowledge. However, it is worthwhile to mention that weneed to talk about the people as well as the planet in the breath, and that is what makes
green economics as the most appropriate foundation for this Chapter. Concepts such as“De-growth”, “Zero Growth”, “Prosperity without Growth”, “Gaian Economics”, “Convivial
Economics”, or “Steady State Economy” could also mean more or less the same thing.
Some of the names that must be mentioned here are Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen (19101993) [and his train of followers such as John M. Gowdy, Herman E Daly, Kozo Mayumi tomention a few], E.F. Schumacher (1911-1993), Kenneth Boulding (1910-1993), Hazel
Henderson, James Lovelock, Richard Douthwaite, Karl-Henrick Robert to mention a few
who have contributed to the new theories growth and development.
Kenneth Boulding used the concept of earth as space ship and tried to work out a shortterm and long term solutions to some of the “succession of mounting crises” such aspollution. He said in his essay “The Economics of the Coming Space Ship Earth” [1969],“...for unless we at least make a beginning on a process for solving the immediateproblems, we will not have much chance of solving the larger ones”. [The earth as aspaceship is amazing: just consider these two facts: Firstly, can you guess at what speed
we rotate every 24 hours, say at the equator? Its 1600 km per hour. Think of it, ourcommercial jets only fly at 1000 km per hour. So, we have been spinning faster than thejet planes all this while, every moment. Secondly, at what speed we make one round of
the Sun from 1st January to 31st December every year? Its amazing 108000 km per hour.
We are hurtling at such great speed in the space, and even do not feel the slightest jerk.
Voyager 1, the farthest man made object in space travels only at 62134 km per hour]]
Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen is perhaps the biggest protagonist of the new theories, whoapplied the laws of thermodynamics to economics. His magnum opus “Entropy Law andthe Economic Process” [1971] gave birth to the Ecological Economics and other newer
sciences. He demonstrated that the infallibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics(also known as the Entropy Law) also was equally applicable to Economics. Thus, hedemolished the production theories of the neoclassical economists.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 229 of 402

15.2.3 Green Politics is Here to Stay
If green be the economics, can politics be far behind. Here is what Lord Beaumont of
Whitley of Green Party, UK, spoke on the 27 th November, 2006 in the British Parliament,“The major changes include the melting of the Greenland icecap and the resultant 6 m risein sea levels that this implies. The upshot of this is that if London, New York, Shanghai,
Mumbai are to be saved and the cost and suffering of the refugees to be avoided going forCO2 concentrations of 550 ppm as the Government is doing is really not enough.” he goes
further to say, “...The Green Party on the other hand believes we must begin to localise our
economies into more efficient and sustainable units, to guarantee the future of our planet
and economy”.
15.2.4 The Alaska Dividend
The Greens have one dream, which looks highly improbable and uneconomical, theUnconditional Basic Income (UBI) of the citizens which is a sum of money given to each
citizen, irrespective of whether the citizen concerned has any income sources or not,without expecting any work in lieu of it [other than filling up forms and annual registration].
There is a very strong UBI movement going on the European Union countries. Details canbe had from http://basicincome2013.eu/. Currently signature campaign is going on by the
UBI activists in the member countries in support of the basic income. If the activists areable to gather 1 million signatures from amongst the 500 million inhabitants of the EU, thenthe matter of UBI would be taken up by the EU and would go for a public hearing in the EU
Parliament. However, Alaska has been running something of a UBI for last 30 years. The
Permanent Fund Dividend was created in 1976 through which a small portion of the out of
the oil revenue was converted into deposits. Until 1982, nobody knew what to do with thefunds, when it was decided that the annual returns of the investment would be equallyshared among all citizens of Alaska. In 2008, the dividend per family was $3,269(translating to $16345 for a family of five). After the financial meltdown post 2008, it
reached as low as $878 per person in 2012. The fund is moving up again. This is one
scheme which has found a large political support as well.
15.3

Permaculture Principles

Permaculture is a word coined by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren, two Australians in
1978. The world originally was meant to refer to permanent Agriculture, but now refers topermanent Culture. In the words of Holmgren, Permaculture is "Consciously designed
landscapes which mimic the patterns and relationships found in nature, while yielding anabundance of food, fibre and energy for provision of local needs." People, their buildings
and the ways they organise themselves are central to Permaculture. Thus thePermaculture vision of permanent (sustainable) agriculture has evolved to one ofpermanent (sustainable) culture”.
15.3.1 Permaculture Design Principles
Holmgren has come out with 12 design principles of Permaculture. These are enumerated
below:
1. Observe and Interact (Beauty is in the eye of the beholder)
2. Catch and store energy (Make hay while the sun shines)
3. Obtain a Yield (You can't work on an empty stomach)

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 230 of 402

4. Apply self-regulation and accept feedback (The sins of the fathers are visited on thechildren unto the seventh generation)
5. Use and value renewable resources and services (Let nature take its course)
6. Produce no waste (A stitch in time saves nine. Waste not, want not)7. Design from patterns to details (Can't see the wood for the trees)
8. Integrate rather than segregate (Many hands make light work)
9. Use small and slow solutions (The bigger they are, harder they fall. Slow andsteady wins the race)
10. Use value and diversity (Don't pull all your eggs in one basket)
11. Use edges and value the marginal (Don't think you are on the right track justbecause it is a well beaten path)
12. Creatively use and respond to change (Vision is not seeing things as they are, but
as they will be)
15.3.2 Six Natural Principles of Birch
As stated by Mollison, there are six principles of Louis Chales Birch, a noted Australian
population ecologist. The comments in brackets are of Mollison.
1. Nothing in nature grows for ever. (There is a constant cycle of decay and rebirth)
2. Continuation of life depends upon the maintenance of global bio-geochemical
cycles of essential elements, in particular, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulphur andphosphorus (Thus we need to cycle these and other minor nutrients to stimulate
growth, and to keep the atmosphere and waters of earth unpolluted)
3. The probability of extinction of population or a species is greatest when the density
is very high or very low (Both crowding and too few individuals of a species may
result in reaching thresholds of extinction) [This is very much applicable in case ofrhinos of Kaziranga, which is having the highest density of rhinos in the world. Even
if we do all the stratagems to control the poaching, the rhinos still may disappear.
This is what all the stakeholders must understand: Its not poaching that's thegreatest threat to the rhinos, but the lack of a bigger habitat is.]4. The chances that species have to survive and reproduce is dependent primarily
upon one or two key factors in the complex web of relations of the organism to its
environment. (If we can determine what these critical factors are, we can exclude,by design, some limiting factors, eg frost, and increase others, eg shelter, est sites)
5. Our ability to change the face of the earth increases at a faster rate than our ability
to foresee the consequences of such change. (Hence the folly of destroying life
systems for short-term profit) [or some moments of false pleasure, say when
hunting game. How I wish there were a species that would just hunt human beingsfor pleasure as a game, as we hunted and sent so many species to extinction...]6. Living organisms are not only means but ends. In addition to their instrumental
value to humans and other living organisms, they have an intrinsic worth. (This is
the life ethic thesis so often missing from otherwise ethical systems). [This could be
the basis of a new ecological jurisprudence – capital punishment for killing wildlife,and life imprisonment for killing fellow humans]
15.3.3 Permaculture Design Principles of Mollison
Mollison considers that the systems we construct should last as long as possible, and takeleast maintenance. These systems, fueled by the sun, should produce not only their own
needs, but [also]the needs of the people creating or controlling them. Thus, they are
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 231 of 402

sustainable, as they sustain both themselves and those who construct them. We can use
energy to construct these system, providing that in their life time, they store or conserve
more energy than we use to construct them or to maintain them. Based on these
considerations, he distilled five design principles for use in Permaculture:
1. Work with nature rather than against it (for example, if we spray for pest
infestations, we end up destroying pest and predators that feed on them, so thefollowing year we get an explosion of pests because there are no predators tocontrol them. Consequently, we spray more heavily, putting things further out ofbalance. Unfortunately, all the pests are never killd, and the survivors breed moreresistant progeny)
2. The problem is the solution (… that only our fixed attitudes are problems...) [Lookdifferently and the problem is gone, its just got converted into a wonderful solution]
3. Make the least change for the greatest possible effect
4. The yield of a system is theoretically unlimited (The only limit on the number ofuses of a resource possible within a system is in the limit of the information and theimagination of the designer)
5. Everything gardens (everything makes its own garden or everything has an effecton its environment. … When we examine how plants and animals change
ecosystems, we may find many allies in our efforts to sustain ourselves and otherspecies.)
15.3.4 Permaculture Design Features
There are numerous design features that could be visible in a permaculture design, mostly
picked up from nature such as layers, patterns and zones. Canopy could be used to createa multilayer system such as top canopy trees, middle canopy, lower canopy, shrubs, herbs,
ground cover (ground creeper and short grasses), sub soil surface (root crops such as
potatoes and edible tubers), and vertical layer of vines and creepers. Patterns could bespiral, honeycomb, sigmoid, helical, sine wave intersections, squares etc. These arerecognised into the design as relationships in space and time, creating edges (orecotones). Sectors are taken into consideration by examining the various energy zones
such as insolation and wind energy. Zoning is a very important concept and briefly outlinedin the next section. Guilds are cohorts or togetherness of different species and the way
they interact with each other. Elements are the actual objects that are used or a part of thedesign and could be anything from species, domestic cattle to rock outcrop.
15.3.5 Permaculture Zonations
Permaculture identifies 5 zones apart from the Zone 0 which is the housing/ built up area
which has the most intense human activity. As the zones go further up, the human activity
gets reduced. A brief of various zones adopted from Ross Mars in “The Basics ofPermaculture Design” [2003].
Zone

Key Features

0

House or human living areas

1

Intensive sheet mulched food gardens, pond, shade-house, greenhouse,rainwater tank, tool shed, some fruit trees such as lemon and low windbreakaround the garden

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 232 of 402

2

Garden beds, animals such as chickens or other poultry, earth-worm farms,
rabbits or guinea pigs, Aquaculture, hedges, compost heap, fruit orchard andnut trees3

Larger-scale orchards and geese, living mulches, goat-pen, bee-hives, fodder
plants, wind breaks, fire breaks

4

Woodlots (long term development), dams, agro-forestry (extensive
culture),shelter belts, windmills, farm stock, swales, drains, dams and otherharvesting strategies

5

Wilderness, natural forest, catchment area, flora and fauna preservation,
wildlife corridors etc.

15.3.6 Industrial Culture vs Sustainable Culture
According to David Holgren, the future lies in sustainable culture, and the prevailingindustrial culture is reaching its global climax. As we slip down this climax, on the otherside of the curve, its permaculture all the way till we hit the low energy sustainable culture.

Holgren has identified the cultural shift from the prevalent industrial to sustainable culture.
This shift is, according to him, largely contributed by permaculture. The differences
between the two cultures are given below:
Characteristic
Energy baseIndustrial Culture

Sustainable Culture

Non renewable

Renewable

Material flows

LinearCyclicalNatural assets

Consumption

Storage

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 233 of 402

Organization

Centralized

Scale

Large

Distributed network
Small

Movement

Fast

Slow

Feedback

Positive

Negative

Focus

CentreEdge

Activity

Episodic change

Rythmic stability

Thinking

Reductionist

Wholistic

GenderMasculine

Feminine

15.3.7 Fryers Forest Eco Village
Fryers Forest is an eco-village situated near Castlemaine, central Victoria, Australia, set up
by David Holgren, the co-founder of permaculture. The site is said to have been degradedby 50 years of gold mining. Mining started in these areas as early as 1851. using thenatural landscape, the site demonstrates use of keyline feature of permaculture design tostore water. Of course, there has been no evaluation of these systems in terms of actual“cause and effect”.
15.4

The Natural Step

Dr Karl-Henrick Robert [20002], a doctor by profession, certain scientific principles of longterm sustainable approach to maintain the earth;\'s ecosystems. The Natural Step lays
down the basic principles and approach using which businesses and society can operate
within the natural cycles operating in the earth system. These principles are:1. matter and energy cannot be destroyed [The law of Conservation of Matter and theFirst Law of Thermodynamics put together]
2. matter and energy tend to disperse so that sooner or later all matter introduced by
man will be released into the natural system [The essence of the Second law ofThermodynamics]
3. Material quality can be characterized by the concentration and structure of matter –we never consume energy, only its exergy.
4. Net increases in material quality on earth can be produced by sun driven
processes. Disorder increases in all closed systems, therefore an exergy flow fromoutside the eco-sphere is needed to increase order.
Material quality as expressed by Robert would mean more usefulness [though usefulness
is subjective, but we need to look in economic sense of it]. For example iron is morevaluable than iron ore. Original source material would be more useful that the waste
generated in the manufacturing process.
15.5

Low Carbon Development

Carbon is 4th most abundant element on the earth, and basic constituent of all living plants
and animals. Therefore, to be “low carbon” or to get “zero carbon” are both misnomers andactually have no physical significance. However, these terms are used more often to mean
reduction in carbon emissions (actually CO 2 emissions). Carbon is also associated with
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 234 of 402

carbon sequestration phenomenon by which the atmospheric CO 2 is recycled into glucose
by the plant bodies, thereby reducing the Green House Gases (GHG) in the atmosphere.
Since the phrase “low carbon” is catchy and conveys the sense of both the phenomenon
equally well, the same has been used in the Report to mean reductions in CO 2 emissions.
Reduction in CO2 emissions can be achieved either by reducing the processes thatconvert C into CO2 or increasing the processes that convert CO 2 into C. All the economic
activities and development processes that encourage these phenomena would be actually
the low carbon processes, or we can term them as low carbon development.
According to Germanwatch [2004], the sea level rise in Bangladesh due to plate tectonics
alone is 4-8 mm per year. This translates to 4-8 cm per decade. According to IPCC [2013],
the best case scenario by the end of the 21 st century would be 0.26-0.55 m rise in waterlevel under the RCP2.6. According to UCS [2011], Bangladesh stands to lose 25% of its
territory. If the situation continues like this, ocean will be at the door step of Assam at theend of next century.
15.5.1 Climate Change and Human Society
It is said that about 6 million years ago, chimpanzees and humans split. However, it was
only 100,000 years ago that the first Homo sapiens started to live in Africa. If one looks at
the Milankovich cycles and somehow reconcile the 100,000 year climate change peaks, its
obvious that the human race has seen the major ice age right at the beginning of the race,
and a few smaller cycles in between, till the climate stabilized about 10,000 years ago.
Therefore, for all practical purposes, the modern human race shall have to learn ways ofcoping with climate change all over again. Projected populations for 2050 are
9,550,944,891 against the estimated population of about 4,000,000 in 10000 BC, an
increase of roughly 2400 times. Therefore, it is certain that climate change is going tocreate ecological refugees in large numbers in a few of decades from now. Suchcalamities cannot be averted unless there is focused and conscious action at local
communities all over the world. It is the sum total of these millions of actions across theglobe that would enable the human race as a whole to swing to mitigation of the ill effects
of climate change. Local action becomes the key to all mitigation strategies in climatechange. In the light of the above, the proposed development model for the Kaziranga
landscape assumes a great significance.
15.5.2 Is Being Green Anti Development?
As foresters, who are said to be custodians of large chunk of land, we are often seen as
anti development, and a “no no” species, whereas the others want to bring electricity,
factories, townships, millions of jobs and what not. The contribution of forestry to GDP isnegligible, and so is also the budget and fund allocation of the Governments for forestry.
This indeed is a very sad state of affairs as it truly does not reflect the actual picture. The
economic development and growth that we are talking off is itself an illusion, and a poison
for the masses that we all consume gladly, just because the West, the so called developed
countries, have already swallowed it deep inside and want others to believe in them. So
we have little option but not to follow suite. This reminds me of the “Politics ofCartography”. Cartography is the way we represent the land and water features of thespheroid earth on a plane paper using projections. The Chief Cartographer, Terry
Hardarker of oxford Cartographers, UK, says in the cartographic introduction of the Peters
Atlas of the World [1989], “we have come to accept as natural a representation of the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 235 of 402

world that devotes disproportionate space to large-scale maps of areas perceived asimportant, while consigning other areas to small-scale general maps. And it ois because
our image of the world has become conditioned, that we have for so long failed torecognize the distortion for what it is – the equivalent of peering at Europe and North
America through a magnifying glass and then surveying the rest of the world through thewrong end of a telescope.” If you have not looked at the Peters Atlas of the World, you
may not appreciate this point of view, which is very important and relevant for the
economic world as well.
Mahatma Gandhi, when asked if, after independence, India would attain British standardsof living, replied, “...it took Britain half the resources of the planet to achieve its prosperity,
how many planets will a country like India require?...”. What Mahatma Gandhi told in 1947,
the climate scients have started to think on those lines after half a century. The ecologicalfoot print of some of the countries including India [Wackarangel & Rees, 1995] shows thetrue picture of the World.

Comparing the foot print in terms of the number of planets required, The diagram below
actually echoes the words of Mahatma Gandhi. India must define its own development
parameters. What the western economic progress has done only is to create monster
nation states and parasite economies. It is no development to eat into the flesh of one's
own mother, rather its cannibalism and nothing more than that. India must chalk out adifferent path of progress and prosperity. We need to invest in research and development
to provide for all clean power, clean transport, clean information and clean agriculture. We
need to look for ways to provide good health, quality education and right skills, ethics andmoral values.
Therefore, there is a need to experiment with new processes that are closely linked with
our own ethos and cultural values. We need to define parameters of quality andachievement differently. We need to set new standards of growth and development before
the world.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 236 of 402

15.6

Renewable Energy

Energy is the source of all development. Energy in the universe is either derived fromgravitation or from nuclear fission or fusion. In case of gravitation, its derived by virtue ofmass directly, and in case of nuclear fission or fusion, its arises from the mass defect in
the fission or fusion process from the Einstein's famous relationship E=MC 2. Energy frommass is directly by way of its position (gravitation), or its movement (kinetic). In case of
movement, it could be four types, translation, rotation (about an external axis), spin (about
its central axis) and vibration (to and fro movement from its mean position). The stars suchas the sun derive their energies from the fission reaction where two smaller nuclei combine
together in producing a third nucleus, and in the process there is small loss of mass, which
in turn generates energy. Mass and energy are governed by two basic principles namely
the Law of Conservation of Energy, the First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy neither canbe created nor destroyed, but can only be transformed from one form to another; and thelaw of Conservation of Mass: Total mass before and after a chemical reaction remain thesame, meaning the mass of the universe rs constant. The law of conservation was givenby the French Chemist Antoine Lavoisier in 1789. According to Walther Nernst, the first law
was discovered by three scientists namely James Joule, Meyer and Helmholtz.
The consequence of mass and energy conservation can be explained from the “mostwanted” equation of combustion of carbon:
C+O2 = CO2 + Δ 349 KJ Mole-1
When 12 g of carbon combines with 32 grams of oxygen, it gives rise to 44 g of CO 2 and349 kJ mole-1 of energy. Now this is where we need to make a departure and think
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 237 of 402

differently. An industrialist may buy coal to burn in order to run the factory, but he is notbuying the oxygen which is more than two times the weight of the coal he purchased. Nor
is he paying for the pollution he is causing by pumping CO 2 more than three and half timesof the coal that he purchased into the atmosphere. Every time you buy fuel (petrol/ diesel)
and ignite the engine of your car, you are also consuming oxygen free of cost more than
twice the weight of the fuel that you purchased. Just imagine, if you were also to buy acylinder of oxygen/ air to run your vehicle. That's where the common sense economics
fails and has landed doing much damage to the environment. No one is paying for theactual cost of the natural resources used in production of goods and services. Just as we
do not account for the contribution of forests in our GDP, so do we not account for the freeoxygen (that's ultimately supplied by the trees and the forest). So much so for the
economics of development. Its actually economics of exploitation.
On the earth, other than gravitational and nuclear, all sources of energy are derived fromthe sun. The emits about 1361 W m -2 energy per second. For an area of size of Kaziranga,
the amount of solar energy received is 18455 peta Joules annually. Compare this with theworld production of energy in the economic system which is only 551 tera Joules, which is33500 times less than what nature gives to Kaziranga alone without charging any
premium. Therefore, even if we are able to harvest this energy with least possible
efficiencies, we shall be able to cut down on carbon emissions considerably. The economic
cost benefits are today against renewable energy technologies due to many factors.
However, Kaziranga as a landscape unit can be conceptualized where considerable
impact may be made by using renewable sources of energy such as solar and wind.
Energy has two other aspects in the sustainability side, firstly energy efficient devices. An
energy efficient device is one which has overall lower energy consumption in its life cycle
assessment (LCA) i.e. energy consumed while producing it and during operation andmaintenance phase, compared to a conventional device. The energy efficient devices costmore (because less demand and hence high cost), difficult to procure and often are notavailable off the shelf. There is no awareness among the public. In a subsidized system ofenergy bills, it would hardly make a difference. Secondly, the renewable energy systems
should be owned and managed by the communities. If its one sided supply driven or
vendor driven scheme, it would fall flat, just as many other solar installations have fallen todisuse and abuse (lifting of battery by miscreants). It should be rather an income
generation and employment generation scheme. To compete against conventional fossil
fuel based energy is a uphill task. Therefore, there has to be a conscious policy level
understanding and targets of increasing renewable energy annually until sustainability isachieved.
15.7

Climate Smart Agriculture

Agriculture, since eternity, has been an activity [which contributes to carbon emissions
substantially] which is highly dependent on weather and local climates. It is subject toboom or bust depending upon so many climatic conditions of rain, drought, frost, hail, windand storm. In event of severe climates changes, agriculture is expected to suffer,endangering food security for all. In face of scarcity, the prices of essential commodities
may go up,making it unavailable for the lower strata of the society. In view of this, theWorld Bank has come up with the concept of Climate Smart Agriculture. According to Woldbank, “Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) is an approach to managing landscapes—
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 238 of 402

cropland, livestock, forests and fisheries—sustainably in the face of climate change. It
aims at 3 goals:
1. Increasing productivity: Produce more food to improve food and nutrition security
and boost the incomes of 75 percent of the world’s poor, many of whom rely on
agriculture for their livelihoods.
2. Enhancing resilience: Reduce vulnerability to drought, pests, disease and othershocks; and improve capacity to adapt and grow in the face of longer-term stresses
like shortened seasons and erratic weather patterns
3. Lowering emissions and/or emissions intensity: Pursue lower emissions foreach calorie or kilo of food produced and avoid deforestation from agriculture.
The CSA approach includes reducing livestock emissions, alternate wetting and drying ofrice crops, agro-forestry, soil carbon sequestration and a number of other integrated
approaches and practices.”
15.7.1 Organic Agriculture
Conventional agriculture, in the post Industrial revolution scenario in the world, and in thepost green revolution scenario in India, is heavily dependent upon high doses of fertilizers,
chemicals, pesticides, irrigation, and High Yielding Variety seeds. Heavy use of chemicals
has led to killing of micro flora and fauna, has destroyed the natural prey and predator
relationships in the natural food chains, contaminated food grains with carcinogenic
effects. Organic agriculture sprang up as a reaction to artificial and harmful means ofgrowing food. Use of super-phosphate and ammonia based fertilizers were alreadyprevalent in the western world during the 18 th century. The ill effects of chemical fertilizers
were already started to be felt as early as beginning of the 20 th century. The organic
farming movement was led by Sir Albert Howard (1873-1974), noted English botanist
educated at the Cambridge University. The other early leaders included Rudolf Steiner(1861-1925) from Australia, Lady Eve Balfour (1899-1990) of the UK, J.I. Rodale (18981971) of the USA. Lady Balfour wrote “The Living Soil” which helped in early spread of the
movement. Later, natural farming techniques were made popular by Masanobu Fukuoka(1913-2008) through his now famous book One Straw Revolution.
The key differences between conventional farming and organic farming is give below:
Conventional Farming

Organic Farming

Apply chemical fertilizers to promote
plant growth

Applynaturalfertilizers,
compost, vermi-compost

Apply insecticides and pesticides tocontrol pests and disease

Restore prey-predator relationships,
Multiply friendly creatures such as birds

Use chemical
weeds

Rotate crops, mulch, till and manual
weeding

herbicides

tocontrol

Give anti-biotics and growth harmones topromote growth of plant and animals

PIL 66/2012

manure,Give organic feed and balanced diet

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 239 of 402

Organic cultivation techniques involve traditional and nature based techniques such as notill method, mulching, use of compost, vermi compost, crop rotation, herbicides etc.
Organic agriculture is no more common sense agriculture. Synthetic chemicals andinorganic fertilizers are totally avoided.

Worldwide 37.2 million hectare of agricultural land is under organic farming. Of this,Australia has the maximum land under organic farming, extending to 12 million ha. India
ranks 33rd in the world in organic farming having 4.43 million ha under organic cultivation.
In India, the Government is promoting organic farming by providing incentives tocultivators of organic food products under the National Horticulture Mission at Rs 10,000
per hectare for maximum area of four hectare per beneficiary, setting up of vermi-compost
units at 50 percent of the cost, subject to a maximum of Rs 30,000 per beneficiary andorganic farming certification at Rs 5 lakh for a group of farmers covering an area of 50
hectare.
Worldwide organic agriculture is now regulated through an international confederation ofmembers and member countries under the umbrella of International Federation of Organic
Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) set up in 1972 at Bonn. The IFOAM has currently morethan 700 members across 160 countries. Globally, organic food market accounts for $57.2
billion. This is expected to grow to $104.4 billion by 2015 with a CAGR of 12.8%.
Organically certified products are able to earn a premium of 20-25% over conventional
products globally.
15.7.2 Organic Certification
The word “Organic” cannot be used commercially on any product without certification.
Several countries have set up their federal bodies for enforcing organic certification, suchas in USA its Organic Food Program run by USDA. The farmer has, in addition to his
works of production, has to maintain whole lot of documentation and audit trail for third
party inspection and verification of his farm, for which he is required to pay certain amountof fee as well. In US and Canada, this fee could be typically between $400-2000 per year
depending upon the third party agency and the size of the operation. IFOAM runs Organic
Guarantee System (OGS) is designed to facilitate the development of organic standards
and third-party certification worldwide and to provide an international guarantee of thesestandards and organic certification.
In India, an organization called INDOCERT which is a nationally and internationallyoperating certification body accredited by National Accreditation Body (NAB), Governmentof India, as per National Programme for Organic Production (NPOP). It offers organic
certification as per USDA-NOP standards for products destined for export to the UnitedStates. It is accredited as per ISO 17021 & ISO 22003 by National Accreditation Board for
Certification Bodies (NABCB, QCI, India) for providing Food Safety Management System
Certification Based on ISO 22000:2005. It also has accreditation from National
Accreditation Board for Education and Training (NABET, QCI, India) for conducting
awareness training programme on Food Hygiene (GMP/ GHP). Besides, INDOCERT holds
international accreditation issued by DAkkS, Germany, for certification for plant production,
animal husbandry, aquaculture, food processing, sub contracting and export of thesePIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 240 of 402

products according to the regulations of the importing countries. It also functions as aplatform for training, awareness creation and information dissemination.
15.7.3

Organic Agriculture: North-east India and Assam

Fertilizer use in the North-east India is very low, averaging to 20 kg/ ha / year. The Assamaverage comes to 31. Assam government is promoting organic farming in a big way.
Ginger, chilli and turmeric have already been identified for organic production on a large
scale, including processing and exports. Pilot schemes were floated in the districts of
Udalguri, Sonitpur and Lakhimpur. Organic farming is underway over 91 ha of land
involving 154 farmers. Through these schemes of promotion of organic farming, already133 MT of organic Joha rice was achieved in 2007, and 60 MT of aromatic rice in 2008.
These have been certified and exports have started. In commercial cultivation, effort has
been made to promote organic tea cultivation as well. A brief description of this effort isgiven below:
The Hatikhuli Organic Cultivation Experiment:
The Amalgamated Plantations Pvt. Ltd (APPL), the new concern taking ownership of thetea gardens earlier belonging to the Tata Tea Ltd, is one of the largest producers of tea inthe country. The company owns 25 tea gardens, of which 4 gardens namely Diffaloo,
Hatikhuli, Sagmotea and xxxx lie within the Kaziranga landscape. In order to prevent any
further degradation of the surrounding environment of Kaziranga, the management
consciously started to convert the Hatikhuli TE into a fully organic farm. The work of
conversion started in 2007 and was completed in 2011. The garden ran through short termlosses in profits and productivity. They had to discontinue the artificial chemical inorganic
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 241 of 402

fertilizers and agro-chemicals. It led to increase in pest attack manifold. The company also
had to change the policy framework and field level guidelines and practices. The wage billof the company also increased due to additional employment of manpower to handle
increased number of activities. There was 57% drop in yields from the pre-conversion
period. The company faced operational losses to the tune of Rs. 12.5 crore in 3 years,
averaging to a loss of Rs. 4.00 crore per year. However, the organic tea from hatikhuli wasreceived well in European countries, and the company was able to get good premium
despite the losses and drop in production. The Hatikhuli tea in 2006, prior to organic
conversion fetched a price of Rs. 67 per Kg, but now fetches a price of Rs. 145 per kg in
the post conversion scenario. Such efforts in the Kaziranga landscape should be
supported by financial assistance till such units make profits. Such efforts could be
supported by the Authority for 2-4 years, till the process matures and the enterprise is in aposition to face competition. This could be applied across the agricultural sector, including
progressive farmers who are willing to switch over to organic mode of farming.
15.8

Low Impact Buildings

Buildings or housing units, as we may call them, are needed to provide the living comfort,right lighting, right temperature, quality air, safe drinking water and a pollution free
enclosed space for living or working or both. As buildings get more insulated, theirrequirements of energy go up very high. Buildings such as computer data centres may use
up as much energy as 2-5 MW alone in a built up space of 30 to 50 thousand square feet.
These buildings generate a lot of heat due to stored computing systems and data storage
systems. On the other extreme, a rural household may be totally off-the-grid (not bychoice, but by compulsion). Between the two extremes, the built up space from the time ofstart of construction to occupancy and usage of the space, every building has considerable
requirement of energy. However, energy is only one of the considerations in a low impact
design which is basically indicative of lowest possible emissions. Low impact design could
include features such as passive solar power, wind energy, use of recycled building
materials, use of locally available building material (consider the amount of carbon
emissions involved in transporting building materials from long distances, even abroad, toa building site), natural cooling and heating, ventilation and proper use of aspects for
maximum day light etc. The six main focus areas of green buildings are:
1. Energy useful (as low as possible/ or as much renewable as possible, best is offthe-grid)
2. Land and water use (minimum coverage, greenery, nature-scaping, gray water,
black water separation and recycle, rain water harvesting)
3. Materials (local materials, recycled materials, least distance of transport)
4. Construction methods (low energy systems, local and indigenous methods)
5. Integration with community (local needs and respect for local value systems andcustoms, green design charrettes and developing green communities)
6. Indoor environment quality (air quality, optimum lights, sound levels, body comfort
and temperature control, waste management)
various facets of low impact buildings, design and certification have been discussed in thesubsequent paragraphs.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 242 of 402

15.8.1 Embodied Energy Analysis
While talking of low impact housing, the calculation of the carbon emissions can become
very critical. The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of a building may not be done correctly, if
embodied energy considerations have been omitted. Embodied energy is the total energy
used in manufacturing/ producing the building material and transporting the same to theconstruction site. For example, unfired earth has a very low embodied energy compared toa fired brick. Unfired earth can be used to make compressed bricks, or rammed to makewalls, or mixed with straw, or even cement. Unfired earth products and construction
methods will have a very low embodied energy unless the earth is transported from somegreat distance away from the site. On the other hand, fired bricks not only use hugeamount of energy in baking, but also in stacking, loading and long distance transportation.
Similarly, lime as a building material will have less embodied energy compared to cement.
Lime is more environment friendly and kind of absorbs atmospheric CO 2 in a process
known as carbonation. Lime continues to breathe and absorb CO 2 and its strength also
increases over the years as it ages. [Woolley 2013]
15.8.2 LEED Certification
LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. It is a programme
offered by the US green Building Council, Washington DC. LEED offers certification
sustainably built structures such as schools, houses, offices and business establishments.
These constructions, all need not be new. LEED has certifying scheme for nine different
types of structures namely, new buildings, existing buildings, commercial buildings
interiors, building cores and shells, retail, schools, health care facilities, homes andneighbourhood development. LEED has four levels of certification depending upon thenumber of LEED points required. Platinum is the highest certification level with 90-136
points, followed by Gold (75-89), Silver (60-74) and Certified (45-59). The features include
parameters such as energy savings, use of recycled building materials, water efficiency,
heating and cooling efficiencies, zero or near zero waste generation, indoor air quality etc.
LEED certification is not static. The US Green Building Council keeps on updating its
requirements in all point categories with new sustainable technologies.
15.8.3 GRIHAGRIHA stands for Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment, the Indian equivalentof the LEEDS developed by TERI and accepted by the MNRE, Govt. of India, as thenational green rating system of buildings in India. All buildings above 2500 sq m in built up
area are eligible for certification under the scheme. GRIHA is a 100 point system covering
34 criteria elements, some of which are optional. The highest rating is 5 Star (91-100),
followed by 4 Star (81-90), 3 Star (71-80), 2 Star (61-70) and 1 Star (50-60).
15.8.4 Net Zero Building
It is known by various names, such as zero energy or zero net energy, all meaning thatshows the energy balance of the building in terms of consumption and production ofenergy. If the building produces more energy than it consumes, its called energy positive
building. Ultra low energy buildings consume a little more than what they produce.
However, when the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing, the energy production
would be nil. In such cases the buildings use captive generation based on fossil fuel suchas diesel. However, some buildings would only import energy from another connected grid
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 243 of 402

supplying green power alone. In India, the Indira Paryavaran Bhawan at Jor Bagh, New
Delhi housing the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of India, is the first certified net
zero building, which was dedicated to the nation by the prime Minister of India on the 25 th
February, 2014.
15.8.5 Off-the-Grid Housing
A 100% Off-the-Grid (OTG) house is difficult to imagine in an urban scenario. However, inmost rural India where development has not touched, houses would be all OTG. Humanity
for thousands of years , everywhere, have lived only in the OTG manner, for there was noelectricity, piped gas or water supply to connect to. Grid housing is post industrial revolution
and post invention of electricity. Today a typical urban house would be connected toelectricity supply grid (and the grid is also expanding to rural areas, with a dedicatedprogramme to connect all unelectrified villages under the Rajiv Gandhi Vidyutikaran
Scheme). Let us tarry here for a while and ponder: assuming India has 250 million
households, and each household needs just 100 W of energy (one bulb of 100 W) for 8hours during night time, the requirement of energy would come to 73 tera Joules, which is
one seventh of the world's energy production in 2013. If the demand is just increased to 10
such bulbs per household, keeping rest of the assumptions unaltered, India alone would
require 730 tera Joules of energy, meaning there would be complete darkness in rest of theworld. The kind of carbon emissions that it will be associated with can be imagined.
Therefore, providing a bulb or a computer or a television set to every Indian household is not
the correct way to grow. We need to look for solar and wind energies with concepts of “OTG
Communities and Villages”, which in short we can call OCV. Each of the OCVs would haveits own grid of solar/wind power and would be connected to other nearby grids for exchangeof clean energy. Storing energy in batteries (Lead Acetate) may not be the sustainable way
in the long run, as it may prove hazardous. However for such concepts to be developed, one
needs to design model villages with low impact housing, but all the comforts of a modern
urban house. Technically the OCV grids would be connected, but each would otherwise be
independent in power requirements. The OCVs could have common source of drinking
water, gray water and rain water harvesting systems. Of course, OCVS may not be able tosolve all the problems such as cooking fuel, cattle and poultry management, which may
require further development and understanding within the community for cooperative
structures to grow and mature.
In the west, OTG living has caught up in a big way. There could be more than a million
people living in the OTG homes in USA, Canada, UK and Europe. However, there arecertain traditional “Indian” communities in US and Canada which are yet to be connected to
the grid supplies. They are also counted in OTG living. However, the difference is that these“Indian” communities have not been connected as so called infrastructure has not reachedso far remote, and as a result these communities resort to using diesel fuel to generate
electricity. The fuel has to be carried long distances by trucks etc and often proves
hazardous. Therefore, such communities are excluded when we talk of OTG living which ispurely from environmental considerations to cut down on emissions.
15.8.6 Model Villages
The Kaziranga landscape needs to develop good concepts with low impact housing designs
and renewable energy supply models for its villages, especially if a community is likely to be
displaced due to some reasons such as natural calamity, erosion or shifting for habitat
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 244 of 402

improvement. In such cases, energy efficient OCV concepts may be tried. One such
community OTG living concept has been given by Eric Wichman, who is an inventor working
for OTG home designs. He has designed several homes with “containers”. He has also
designed a water dispenser which takes moisture from the air and outputs clean drinking
water. Wichman's concept of OTG communities is worth looking at.

The community can grow as well. The design uses renewable sources of energy, on-sitewater source, and most interestingly, it also incorporates vertical farming. Vertical farming
is a model which uses the sky scraper concept to grow food and vegetable using solar
energy and moisture. Its a kind of multi-storyed green house. The central facilities and thefarm are located in a central tower, and the communities live on the periphery. It has beenvariously argued that conventional farming may not be all that good for long term survivalof human beings, and ever increasing populations. If vertical farming is not resorted to, we
may not have sufficient space to grow food for all in the coming times. Further,conventional agriculture is also seen as disruptive to other species.
15.8.7 Grey Water
Grey water is a concept applicable mostly in urban areas, apartments and hotels where allwater from the sinks, washing machines and laundry, bathroom, showers, heating andcooling systems [but not the water containing feces] can be re-used. A person on anaverage uses about 75 litres of water daily. Most of this water, other than that used forflushing, can be reused without much treatment. Gray water may contain detergents andsoaps, shampoo, oils, salts and other pollutants. Therefore, it is not advisable to allow thiswater to “run off” or drain into streams and river channels. The water may not also be
stored beyond 24 hours, as the organic/ inorganic molecules contained in water may break
down, reducing its nutritional value for plants. The water can be used to recharge groundwater, or used for irrigating lawns and gardens. It can also be treated for better use of thewater again for washing etc. However, there are associated energy costs, and the overall
foot-print may go up, defeating the basic purpose of the recycling. In several countries
there are gray water use codes and guidelines, and often the residents need to takepermits for installing gray water systems. However, in few states in the US, mere following
the guidelines is seen as good enough enforcement. In the context of Kaziranga
landscape, gray water becomes important for the tourist zones and model villages.
15.8.8 Rain Water Harvesting
The importance of rain water harvesting (RWH) cannot be emphasized more when one istalking of low impact housing and reducing the ecological foot print of the building.
Rainwater is soft, as against gray water which is hard. It does not require any, or may
require a little, treatment before use. Often the falling water from the roofs is guided
through directed and well sloped gutters along the roof's edges to carry the rain water tostorage tanks. The storage tanks could be above ground or under ground. The water canbe directly used for washing and cleaning. It cab be also used for drinking provided it is
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 245 of 402

passed through a set of filters (carbon filter for removing organic matter and membranefilter for particle removal). The stored water is often used for fire-fighting and irrigation
purposes as well. The urban building bye laws now, under the JNNURM, being revised tomake RWH mandatory. The RWH primer of JNNURM says, “The main objective of making
rainwater harvesting mandatory in all buildings is to recharge groundwater and augment
overall water availability. This measure will ensure that the rain falling on all buildings istapped and directed to recharge groundwater aquifers or stored for direct consumption/use by occupants of buildings. With increasing population in urban areas, the municipal
bodies and other public agencies are increasingly finding it difficult to supply water inadequate quantities to citizens. Often citizens use private tube wells to supplement themunicipal supply for their daily needs. Recharging ground water will raise aquifer levels
and will help municipal and other public agencies to have access to larger quantities ofgroundwater. In alluvial areas, energy saving for 1m rise in ground water level is around0.40 kilo watt per hour. Recharging aquifers will also reduce the requirement for additional
financial resources for augmenting water supply.” Therefore, rainwater harvesting must bea part of any building design in the landscape.
15.8.9 Waste Management
Waste management is another key component of any low impact housing design and is ahall mark of a green building. For green buildings, waste management starts from theinception of construction and how the building material waste is handled, including theirtransport and re-use. The building should have the management streams for handling foodwaste, paper and other recyclable waste such as textiles and plastics, liquid waste
especially water/ gray water and solid human wastes. Composting toilets are gaining
acceptance as a safe way to remove solid wastes and reduce health hazards. There arealso vermi-composting toilets. There are systems under development that use solar heatusing optical fibres to help digest the solid waste. Through these treatment processes, thesolid waste is converted into usable fertilizer for plants. The black water (water containing
feces) can be separated from the solid waste, and treated for use for irrigation purposes.
However, such systems may prove costly, difficult to install and maintain. Specialized
wetland also can be created near such communities where partially treated black wateralong with solid waste is treated for safe decomposition of the waste.
15.8.10

FAR or Building Carbon Footprint?

The normal way to ration built up space in an urban area is allowable Floor Area Ratio or
Floor Area Index. FAR is the ratio of the total built area to the area of the plot. For
example, if there is a plot of size 200 sq yards in a zone where the allowable FAR is 2,
then the owner of the plot can build maximum of 3600 sq ft in construction. The urban
bodies allow different FAR depending upon the zone, site or purpose of the building (suchas IT buildings may be allowed double FAR). FAR controls the total constructed space.
FAR is used also in conjunction with other parameters such as maximum covered area ofa plot may not exceed 75% of the total area, forcing the owner to leave 25% of the area as
green cover/ lawn. Often height regulations such as only 1-storey building or two storey
buildings allowed. FAR controls broadly the densities of population in a given area. In
residential area, a FAR of 4 may lead to population densities as high as one lakh persons(actually with 75% area to be covered, the exact number of 1200 sq ft flats would come to25000 in a sq km area with FAR of 4). Whether the said zone or area or city or site canafford water, electricity, roads, transport, emergency evacuation, sewerage, shopping and
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 246 of 402

recreational requirement of more than 1 lakh residents or not must be examined before
arriving at FAR.
However, we must consider this rather seriously that every square foot of the earth's virginsurface that is covered with concrete and tar is actually a crime against nature. A building
is an act against nature. A building directly makes some proportion of the earth's surfaceorganically sterile by covering it over, rendering that area of soil incapable of producing
those natural resources that require the interaction between soil, sun and water [Cooper &Curwell, 1998]. Now let us consider the above hypothetical case of designing 25000 flatsin 1 sq km of space on 75% of the area with FAR 4 and each dwelling unit of 1200 sq ft,
and assume that the city has all the requisite infrastructure to host a lakh of people overthat piece of land. if we were to cover all the 75% of the space, we would build 6250 flats
per floor and go upto 4 floors. Else we could also use 50% of the available space and build
8 storey structures, or save 75% of the earth's surface by building 16 storey structures, so
on and so forth. Where should we ideally stop? The answer to this question should be
provided by calculating the carbon foot-print of the building, with a premium on land saved
from concreting in the process. Lesser the ground area covered, the better it is from
ecological point of view. However, vertical expansion can be a challenge from
infrastructure view point such as availability of standby power, lifts beyond the 4 th floor,
parking and road network, transportation etc.
15.9

Green Transportation

The transport sector is one of the main polluters and contributor to carbon emissions. India
ranks as the fourth largest contributor of green house gases. However, India being world's
second largest population, its per capita emissions are less than half of the world average.
The transportation sector is the second largest contributor of GHG emissions in India.
[UNEP, 2013]. Calculating GHG emissions from transport sector is also a very complex
process. Schipper et al [2000] worked out a model called AISF Model on a bottoms up
approach, according to which, the total emissions from the transport sector is worked up
from bottom to top as depicted in the schematic diagram below:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 247 of 402

15.9.1 Actual Fuel Cost
Fossil fuels are the biggest polluters of the environment. The fossil fuels include coal, oiland natural gas, and their derivatives. Globally 57% of the total GHG emissions arecaused by combustion of fossil fuels alone. As per USDE, the use of fossil fuels has
serious ramifications for the environment. The burning of fossil fuels produces around 21.3
billion tonnes (21.3 gigatonnes) of CO2 per year, but it is estimated that natural processes
can only absorb about half of that amount, so there is a net increase of 10.65 billion tonnesof atmospheric carbon dioxide per year [one tonne of atmospheric carbon is equivalent to44/12 or 3.67 tonnes of carbon dioxide]. The fossil fuels are of three types, namely solid
fuel such as coal, liquid fuel such as petrol, diesel, kerosene and aviation fuel, andgaseous fuel such as natural gas [Boden et al, 2012]. To these three sources, gas flaring
and emissions from cement are also added, making a total of 5 sources of fossil fuelbased emissions. As per IPCC, 2007, the contribution to emissions from solid fuels was
39%, and liquid fuels was 37%. As already explained, burning fuel is only one part of theeconomic activity, the supply of free air is not accounted for. Neither are the emitted CO 2
quantities accounted for in any pricing mechanism today. Here an attempt has been madeto arrive at actual environmental costs of fuel from an economic point of view (but not fromthe angle as to how much would it cost to remedy the situation).
Environmental Cost of Diesel Fuel:
Assuming that a 45 L cylinder of compressed air costs $45, translating to cost of portable
air a $ 1 per litre. Assuming cost of 1 litre of diesel to be Rs.55.00, let us find the actual
cost of diesel. 1 liter of diesel weighs 835 grammes. Diesel consist for 86,2% of carbon.
Therefore, 720 grammes of carbon is contained per liter of diesel. In order to burn thiscarbon to CO2, 1920 grammes of oxygen is needed. Therefore, the amount of CO 2
produced is 720 + 1920 = 2640 grams per liter of diesel. Further assuming that 1 L of air
weighs 1 gm (actually at STP, its 1.238 gm), 2 kg of air would be required to burn 720 gm
of carbon. Therefore, the total fuel cost comes to Rs. 55+120 (2 L of air at @ $1=Rs.
60.00), i.e. 175.00 per L of diesel. Further, since for every 12 gm of carbon, 44 gm of CO2
is released, which is 3.67 times the fuel, we need to levy 3.66 times the cost of fuel as“Penalty”, which comes to Rs.183.50. Therefore, the total cost of 1 L of diesel comes to
Rs. 175+183.50= Rs. 358.50. Therefore, Rs. 358.50 is the price that every user of diesel
should pay per litre of diesel. This could be the environmental cost of diesel, the price of
which, otherwise, every human being shall have to pay in coming times at the cost of theirlives and future progeny.
Environmental Cost of Petrol Fuel:
Assuming that 1 litre of petrol weighs 750 gm and contains 87% of carbon, we know that 1
litre of petrol contains 652 gm of carbon, which would require 1740 gm of oxygen to
produce 2392 gm of CO2. Following the arguments used for diesel price calculations, we
assume the price of 1 litre of petrol to be Rs. 75.00. Further, roughly little less than 2 kg of
air would be required to burn 652 gm of carbon. Therefore, the total fuel cost comes to Rs.
75+120 (2 L of air at @ $1=Rs. 60.00), i.e. 195.00 per litre of petrol. Just as we did fordiesel in the paragraph above, we need to levy 3.66 times the cost of fuel as “Penalty”,
which comes to Rs.183.50. Therefore, the total cost of 1 litre of petrol comes to Rs.
195+274.50= Rs. 469.50. Therefore, Rs. 469.50 is the environmental price that every userof petrol should pay per litre of the fuel.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 248 of 402

15.9.2 Safe Walkways
The Green Party of New Zealand has announced in March, 2014 that they would invest$200 million to build infrastructure in next 3-4 years around the schools. The Vancouvercity has drawn up an ambitious programme of green transport by 2020 including “OpenStreet” program under which initiated in four different neighbourhoods with Summer
Spaces- closed streets to cars and opened up the asphalt to a whole range of activities
including badminton, salsa dancing, street hockey, art lessons, choirs, food carts, lounging
on couches, and much more....” Salt Lake City's Green Transportation Plan 2015 provides
for walkways for public, school children and neighbourhood walkways to commercial andmarket places by promoting “Walkable neighbourhood” program and “Safe Route To
School” programmes. They also provide walking resources, information and maps for all.
However, the road planning in India does not seem to take into account safe walking. The
roads are mainly meant for connectivity. The Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana(PMGSY) was launched on 25th December, 2000 to provide all-weather access tounconnected habitations. The PMGSY is a 100% Centrally Sponsored Scheme. The
funding comes from the Govt of India, and 50% of the Cess on High Speed Diesel (HSD)
is earmarked for this programme. The recommended road width is 7.50 m in plains and6.00 m in hill sections. The carriageway is 3.75 m, and there is a shoulder of 1.875 m oneither side. Therefore, its is clear that the PMGSY roads are not meant for pedestrians. To
make them pedestrian friendly, especially in the Kaziranga landscape, the following aresuggested:
1. All roads including PMGSY roads should have pedestrian foot paths within the
Kaziranga landscape.
2. Since as per the IRC:103-2012 guidelines of the Indian Road Congress (IRC), thewidth of a footpath cannot be less than 1.8 m, therefore, an additional 1.8 m pitchedwith should be added on either side of the carriage way. This would make the roadprofile as below:
1. Carriageway width
5.500 m2. Footpath on either side
1.800 m3. Earthen Shoulder (either side)
1.000 m4. Total width of road
11.100 m
3. Within Jakhlabandha to Bokakhat, the NH37 should be padded with 2.5 m on eitherside for pedestrian and bike traffic.
4. Within Jakhlabandha to Bokakhat, the fly overs on the NH37 should have adequate
provision for on either side for pedestrian and bike traffic, which should be at least
2.5 m on either side.
5. Certain areas in Kohora and Bagori should be developed only for pedestrians andcyclists with exclusive right of way.
6. All the roads within the Kaziranga landscape should have adequate pedestrian
infrastructure such as shade trees on the sides, bench with shades, zebra
markings, bollards, П shaped bollards, signages and blinking lights etc.
7. The infrastructure should be disabled friendly.
8. The norms of PMGSY may be revised accordingly for Kaziranga landscape.
15.9.3 Safe Cycling
Cycling is being promoted in a big way in major cities of the world, and efforts are on bymost of the Governments in the west to chalk out ways in which the numbers of people
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 249 of 402

cycling could be increased or ways in which better infrastructure and more road space
could be provided to the cyclists. Copenhagen, for example, has come with a bouquet ofmeasures to promote cycling. Copenhagen's Bicycle Strategy, 2011-2025, which replaced
the earlier Cycle Policy 2002-2012, states, “...In other words, cycling is not a goal in itself
but rather a highly-prioritised political tool for creating a more liveable city. Copenhagen isalready a fine bicycle city. Every single morning hundreds of thousands of Copenhageners
choose the bicycle as the most natural thing in the world. It is amazing to many foreigners
and the source of great interest for journalists, researchers, politicians and urban planners
from every corner of the world.” Copenhagen has already 1,50,000 cyclists going to officeor school everyday. The City Mayor wants to increase the current modal share of bicycles
from 36% to 50% by 2015, which means encouraging another 55,000 citizens to cycle.
Some of the strategies being adopted by the authorities are:
1. Making certain streets one way for cars in order to create improved space for better
cycling conditions
2. Adding new types of bikes parking – including cargo bikes
3. Create infrastructure like footrests, air pumps along the road
4. Communication campaigns
5. Use of LED Lane lights for cyclists
The city is currently running an Intelligent Traffic System (ITS) including installation of LED
lights in asphalt to have e better lane management for bikers.
In contrast are the Indian roads, which are neither meant for pedestrians or bikers – they
are designed only for polluting vehicles and speeding traffic to heighten noise pollution andchaos.
15.9.4 Public Transport
Public transport covers passenger and freight movement. About 85% emissions in thetransportation sector are from the surface transport alone. Investment in the public
transport sector holds the key to cut down emissions. As emissions are directly
proportional to the passenger-km traveled, public transport directly cuts down emissions
by reducing passenger-km travel. It is estimated that public transport can cut down 37
million metric tons of emissions alone in USA. According to the American Public
Transportation Association (APTA), “A single person, commuting alone by car, who
switches a 20-mile round trip commute to existing public transportation, can reduce his or
her annual CO2 emissions by 4,800 pounds per year, equal to a 10% reduction in all
greenhouse gases produced by a typical two-adult, two-car household. By eliminating one
car and taking public transportation instead of driving, a savings of up to 30% of carbon
dioxide emissions can be realized.” Surface transportation emissions can be cut down tozero or near zero emissions by deploying technologies such as Electric Vehicles. Several
Governments across the world are in the process of promoting Electric Vehicles to achieve
zero emissions in transportation of passengers and goods.
The UK Government runs a Plug-In Van Grant of £8,000. And in Scotland, the Energy
Saving Trust offers interest-free loans of up to £50,000 to purchase Edison vehicles.
Companies purchasing commercial EVs can write down 100% of the capital cost against
tax in the first year of ownership. Electric commercial vehicles are exempt from the annual
Road Fund License Tax and van drivers are also exempt from Van Benefit Charge for the
first five years of ownership. All EV registered vehicles, such as Smith, are exempt fromPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 250 of 402

the London Congestion Charge, apart from a small annual registration fee. In Germany,
EVs are exempt from annual vehicle registration tax for the first 5 years of ownership. The
Federal government has pledged €1 billion for R&D projects, including funds to procure
fleets of commercial EVs for demonstration projects. Singapore has embarked upon ascheme to procure EVs worth $20 million. We need to look at zero emission options for theKaziranga landscape. However, its would not be cheap going by the normal economic
calculations. In the three paragraphs that follow EV options for goods, passenger andprivate transport has been briefly discussed.
15.9.5 Electric Truck
Goods transportation happens over long ranges with heavy transportation vehicles and in
short ranges with light and medium transport vehicles in what is called the distribution
trucks. Freight transport contributes significantly to GHG emissions. In USA, 95% of all
heavy duty trucks are diesel powered. Beginning in 2007, all heavy duty diesel trucks sold
had to meet particulate emissions levels of no more than 0.01 grams per brake horsepower hour (g/HP-hr)—a level near zero. Since 2007, US has been able to achieve till
2013, 33.5% induction levels of the new trucks which have near zero emission levels[mhlnews.com, 214]. The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT)
commissioned CE Delft and DLR to carry out a study, which aims to investigate thepotential of battery electric and fuel cell heavy - duty vehicles [Delft, 2013]. The Electric
Vehicle solution driven by the concept of recharging batteries at short distances has beenfound to work very well for distribution trucks. Not only that the emissions are cut down tozero, but also overall efficiency doubles. Distribution trucks upto 9 MT are found to be very
efficient for EV technology adoption. A 9 MT EV truck may cost somewhere around$75000. Currently more than 1000 EV trucks are in operation as distribution trucks
worldwide. In next five years the battery technologies would improve further and costs
would also go down, making EV trucks a very viable option. However, in respect of long
haul heavy duty trucks, the scenario does not look very bright. The on-the-road-charging
infrastructure would be required to be maintained at smaller distances which makes the
proposition unviable to operate. However, the newer technologies that may emerge at theend of a decade or so, would definitely bridge the gaps. It is expected that new researches
in Lithium-air batteries and other ultra capacitative technologies, the zero emissions on thelong haul may be achieved. Catenary wire based energy systems also would require
dedicated corridors to be set up, which do not look very promising in the long haul sector.
15.9.6 Electric Bus
Trams can be technically termed as the earliest electric buses developed way back in
1915. However, technology has taken a full turn, and today electric buses with power
supply lines on the top are running. Power lines could also be embedded within thesurface of the road. The most interesting innovations are seem to be happening for ultrahigh capacity capacitors. Capacitors can hold high amount of charge for a short period.
This property has been used to make Capabus which have an array of capacitors which
need to be charged at short distances. This is ideal for public buses which stop after every
fe minutes. The current capabuses can run on a single charge upto 4.8 km. The design forhigher distance, upto 32 km, is already on trial. The bus stand can be solar powered totransfer charge to the capacitors within a few minutes. As reported by
http://www.engineering.com, a Proterra EV bus clocked 700 miles in 24 hours with a few
charging stations in between. On 27 th February, 2014, India's first EV bus was launched in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 251 of 402

Bengaluru. The upfront cost of the bus was Rs. 2.70 crore against Rs. 90.00 being thecost of an AC Volvo. The swanky AC bus has capacity of 41 passengers, and runs at half
the operational cost of the Volvo. The bus fair has been kept similar to that of the Volvobuses. Proterra claims $456,000 in savings over a diesel bus of similar capacity. Thistranslates to Rs. 2.73 crore in Indian currency, making the total cost of ownership muchless than a conventional Volvo bus.

15.9.7 Electric Vehicles
Since 2010, Electric Vehicles (EV) have come of age, and are increasingly being used in
private and public transport modes. All electric range (AER) has gone beyond 100 km,
meaning one can drive a 100% EV vehicle for more than 100 km at a stretch without
requiring to re-charge the batteries. The speeds have gone up from 30 Kmph to more than
100 Kmph. Models available are from golf cars to personal driving cars, buses, SUVs and
ATVs. The two top ranking models are: one by Mitsubishi iMiEV and one by Honda.

Mitsubishi iMiEV

Honda Fit EV

The reviews of EV cars are very encouraging. Here is one review of iMiEV from
TheChargingPoint.com's Michael Boxwell who took out a Mitsubishi i-MiEV, with an official
claimed range of up to 92 miles, to get some real-world figures: “I drove the Mitsubishi at
the legal limit during a Thursday evening rush hour on the M45 and M1 motorways. Traffic
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 252 of 402

was busy, but congestion was low, allowing me to cruise at the legal limit for most of thetime. Headlights were used for the entire trip and the radio and heated driver’s seat wereused for part of the journey. Average speed for the entire trip was 63mph [101 Kmph] withthe car cruising at 70mph [112 Kmph] for the majority of the journey. Range achieved: 53.7
miles [86.42 Km]”. As per the official website of Honda, the Honda Fit costs $37,415(2014), and has a AER of 82 to 115 Miles depending upon the road conditions. It can be
fully charged within 3 hours to 15 hours depending upon the charging modalities. It canaccommodate 5 passengers.
Environmental Economics of an EV:
Assuming that given the Indian road conditions, a car may not be able to give an average
mileage of more than 12 km per litre, and may run upto 250000 km during its life time, andassuming a price of diesel to be Rs. 50 per litre, it is seen that the fuel cost of a vehicle
during its life time comes to Rs. 10,41,600.00 at current fuel prices. The cost of thevehicles such as a Bolero (Mahindra) would be Rs.8.00 lakh. Therefore, the life cycle costof the vehicle comes to Rs. 18,41,600.00. This would be roughly the cost of Honda Fit (ifimports are made free for sake of clean environment). If we look at the environmental cost,
the fuel charges alone would be Rs. 358.50 per litre as calculated earlier in the section
above. Therefore, the environmental running cost of the Bolero vehicle would be Rs.
74,68,750.00, and the life cycle cost would be Rs. 82,68,750.00. During its run of 250,000
Km, the Bolero would generate CO2 emissions of 55 tons. On the other hand, the EV cost
shall be only $37,415 for its life time (excluding repairs), and the emissions would be
confined to amount of electricity used for charging of the car. That also can be made zeroby using a 9.5 kW Solar PV panel for charging the car. Therefore, environmentally, theHonda Fit EV is 3.68 times cheaper than Mahindra Bolero (at $1=Rs.60) in anenvironmental life cycle assessment.
Developing EV Infrastructure:
However, the Indian road conditions may prove to be a major challenge for the EV, by
heavily eating into the rated AER with numerous rumble strips, speed breakers, live speed
breakers (cattle, poultry and piggery on the road), pot holes and mud (during rainyseason). Nevertheless, we need to develop adequate infrastructure for EV such as
charging stations at regular intervals on the highways, charging stations at major public
places, parking lots, hotels and residential apartments. The bus stands could be converted
into charging stations with solar and wind power. There would also be requirement of
repair and maintenance workshops.
Developing EV Promotion Policy:
Given the current costs of EV trucks, buses and vehicles, an effective promotion policy isrequired to be chalked out for achieving zero emissions in the transportation sector.
Though the zero emission technologies are very well suited for Kaziranga landscape, acomprehensive plan of inducting EV fleet in the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, as well as jeep
Safari and general public passenger and freight transport within the landscape would
have to be developed. A Green Road Tax may also be introduced for the visitors to
Kaziranga to create funds for the cause of zero emission vehicles and associatedinfrastructure bulding and maintenance. Sketches of a policy outline have been attemptedin the next chapter for this purpose.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 253 of 402

15.9.8 Transit Oriented Development (ToD)
Kaziranga landscape is very well suited for a transit oriented development (TOD). Thoughkaziranga does not have any mass raid transport or rail transport, the tourism hubs ofKohora, Bagori, Agoratoli/ Bokakhat and Burapahar can be redesigned and modeled insuch a fashion that they become the transit points for all tourists and passengers to avail
public transport, commercial and market places, and also hotels and lodges. For thiscertain amount of zoning and relocation of some old establishments, opening of new “carfree” pathways may be required. It would also require provision for paid/free zero emission
shuttle services between different tourists points and transit locations. These could be
operated by private operators on payment basis or by hotel owners for their guests on
payment/ complementary basis.
15.9.9 Better Roads
The roads can be “green” too. The smallest interventions could be creating beautiful
avenue plantations along the road, providing solar powered LED lane markers andsignages, providing adequate space to pedestrians and cycles in a planned manner,
widening the roads to provide more space for them (pedestrians and cycles), providing
over-passes and fly-overs for wildlife to have spacious under-passes and well designed
corridors, asphalt overlay LED signs controlled by sensors and similar such possibilities.
The other extreme of technologies emerging are astounding and, if proved successful,
may have great potential for future energy production and transform the roads altogether.
One such pilot experiment has been initiated by US Highway Federal Administration
involving replacing the asphalt with hexagonal thick glass covered solar panels and LEDs.
An array of these panels have been used to build a parking lot as a proof of concept.
Compared to $1.00 cost of asphalt, the new technology may cost $70.00 per sq ft, besides
issues of management, maintenance and durability.

Solar Roadway Parking Lot

15.10

The Future Solar Roadway

People's Framework

The southern boundary of the Park is inhabited by about 150 villages. The livelihood of thepeople of these villages are mainly of agriculture based and to some extent tea plantation
activities and rearing cattle. The socio-economic conditions of the majority of villages
mainly inhabited by tribal and backward communities are very poor. As the existing wildlife
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 254 of 402

laws do not allow traditional access to forest based resources in the Park/ Tiger Reserve,
people have to explore other areas for some activities like cattle grazing, collection of fuelwood, fishing etc. Besides, the wild animals come out of the Park/ Tiger Reserve andcause significant damage to life and property of the people resulting in man-animal
conflict. Therefore to uplift the socio-economic condition of the people of the fringe villages
and to maintain a good relations between the Park management and the villagers, apeople friendly framework has been proposed here.
OBJECTIVES:• To create a congenial relation between the Park management and the people,
which will act as an effective barrier against attempt of poachers and miscreants.
• To improve capacity of Protected Area management to conserve resources of thePark and to achieve local co-operation in achieving Park management objectives.
• To develop effective and extensive support for eco-development.
SPECIFIC ISSUES:• Alternative livelihood strategies.
• Improvement of living condition.
• Mitigating negative impact arising out of man animal conflict.
• Community development work.
• Non consumptive use of Protected Area through eco-tourism.
• Reduce dependence of villagers on forest resources.
• Introduce low impact housing, net zero buildings, off-the-grid housing technologies
BROAD STRATEGIES:• Conduct participatory micro-planning and provide implementation support for• Eco-development• Green development• Green growth• Eco- Tourism• Provide assistance for village Eco-development program which specify measurable
action by villagers to strengthen conservation effort of the Park management.
• Implementation of Eco-development activities which will encourage alternative
livelihood and resource use, conservation and protection of the Protected Area.
• 30% share from the income of the Tiger Reserve for eco-development.
15.10.1

Millennium Development Goals (MDG)

The United Nations (UN) Millennium Declaration was adopted at the Millennium Summit
held at the UN HQ at New York City from 6 th to 8th September, 2000, in which nationscommitted to a new global partnership to reduce extreme poverty and set up a series oftime bound targets with a dead line of 2015. These are known as Millennium Development
Goals (MDG). There are eight goals, 18 targets, complemented by 48 technical indicators
to measure progress towards the MDGs. The eight MDGs are:
1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
2. Goal to achieve universal primary education
3. Promote gender equality and empower women
4. Reduce child mortality
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 255 of 402

5. Improve maternal health
6. Combat HIV/ AIDS, malaria and other diseases
7. Ensure environmental sustainability
8. Develop a global partnership for development
The Kaziranga Green Growth Framework envisages to incorporate the MDGs for
implementation in the landscape.
15.10.2

Building Green and Resilient Communities

The communities around the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve are prone to several calamities anddisasters such as floods, erosion, (drought), disease (heightened by lack of adequate
amenities), attack from wild animals such as rhino, tiger, elephant, buffalo, wild boar etc.,
loss of cattle and life, damage of crops, possible ill effects of flowering of various trees
such as Simul, and spread of pollens and seed dispersal which may lead allergy andsickness of poultry, cattle and humans, flying ashes from large scale burning of grasses,
and vulnerability arising out of lack of adequate means of livelihood and regular income,limited seasonal income from tourism for the few stake-holders, restrictions on
construction, use of fertilizers, ban on change of land use etc. to mention a few. To this weneed to add vulnerabilities arising out of climate change such as flash floods, droughtspells, excessive heat, change in cropping pattern, loss of productivity, loss of bio-diversity,
eruption new diseases etc. Some of these are natural and arising out of geographicalconditions which cannot be wished away, few others are a natural fall out of staying close
to a National Park/ Tiger Reserve, while the rest arise out of the conservation strategies
and cannot be wished away so easily. While migration is the only option to escape fromthese disasters and vulnerabilities, yet this could be only voluntary.
Risk has been defined as a product of Hazard and Vulnerability [Blaikie et al, 2004].
Vulnerabilities could be of four types namely:
1. Physical2. Social
3. Economic (and Business)
4. Environmental

R= HxV
Resilient communities reduce their risks and vulnerabilities towards physical and socioeconomic changes and are able to bounce back to normal conditions in a short span oftime. This is possible when the communities are well built, make efficient use of natural
resources, have a strong socio-economic base, wise use and law abiding. Increase in thefrequency of natural hazards coupled with rise in population threatens the resiliencecapacity of communities making them vulnerable to climate variations/ Climate change
impacts. This loss of resilience may be restored through a meticulous planning andpreparedness incorporating low carbon growth strategies. The low carbon strategies havealready been explained in some detail in the early part of this chapter. Some of strategies
and measures that are likely to bring resilience in the local communities are suggested
below:
1. Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF)
2. Social and financial inclusion
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 256 of 402

3. Alternative livelihoods
4. Gender mainstreaming and women's empowerment
5. Man animal interface management
6. Capacity building and IEC
7. People's participation and planning
15.10.3

Sustainable Livelihood Framework

Livelihood interventions for for bringing people out of poverty has been the endeavour ofnational and international agencies. While many such interventions have been successful,it has been observed that sustainability of such interventions remains an issue. It has been
observed that communities relapse into their previous state over a period of time once theinterventions are withdrawn. Thus the objective of self reliance set up by all thedevelopmental programmes is rarely achieved. This happens because the focus is mostly
on developmental issues while ignoring or giving less weightage to risks and vulnerabilities
while planning for development projects. To overcome this barrier it is proposed to adopt
the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF). The SLF was developed by DFID and CARE
based on field experiments. It is a flexible framework which can be modified and adopted
based on local conditions and needs.
Livelihood Assets:
The core components of the SLF are the five livelihood assets represented through alivelihood pentagon. These are:
1. Natural Capital
2. Physical Capital (Built capital/ man made capital)
3. Human Capital
4. Financial Capital
5. Social Capital
The natural capital includes all natural resources such as land, water, forests, wildlife,
biodiversity etc. The physical capital implies all the man made structures and infrastructuresuch as houses, boats, roads, bridges etc. Human capital implies all human resource, theirknowledge, skills, capabilities, education, health & nutrition, attitudes etc. Banks, insurance
sector, credit and loaning systems, SHGs etc. fall in the financial capital. The social capital
includes social networks, customary laws, traditional practices, local institutions such as
youth clubs, namghar, mahila samitis, maina parijat, sports clubs etc. which are informal
institutions that help bind the society together. The ideal condition for livelihoods to besustainable is that all the five capitals should be in balance in a given unit of development
such as a village. Normally it is observed that such an ideal condition rarely exists. Thus,
the crux of the successful livelihood intervention lies in the ability to diagnose the gap in
the five capitals and take up measures to overcome the imbalances, and try to see thatthe pentagon is close to balance.
Vulnerability Context:
For sustainability of livelihoods, it is important to overlay the existing vulnerabilities that
tend to throw a balanced livelihood pentagon into an imbalance. These vulnerabilities
include shocks, trends and seasonality. Shocks include loss of crop due to flooding, pest
attack, epidemics in the community, change in technology etc. Trends such as fluctuating
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 257 of 402

market prices, rise and fall in demand or supply affect livelihoods as externalities that may
adversely impact income. Seasonality is another important factor on which livelihoods
depend. Seasonality restricts certain income generating activities over different times ofthe year.

Transforming Structures, Processes and Policies:
The sustainability of livelihoods also gets impacted by the dynamic governance structures,
policies, laws and processes. Processes also include culture and institutions (formal andinformal). These changes may cause conflicts, generate new threats, or even provide newopportunities. The community should have enough internal capacity and resilience to copewith such unforeseen changes.
Livelihood Strategies and Outcomes:
The livelihood strategies need to be developed and designed keeping in mind thelivelihood assets, the vulnerability context, transforming structures and process to ensure
positive livelihood outcomes that provide:
1. Higher income
2. Reduce vulnerability
3. Enhance resilience
4. Provide self reliance15.10.4

Social and Financial Inclusion

The communities living near the protected areas network often are disadvantaged due toinherent remoteness from large cities and towns, financial hubs and markets. The physicalconnectivity such as rail, roads and airways often are poor or non existent. The modernmeans of communication also do not fully touch these areas. The vulnerabilities of thecommunities are also higher compared to another community in another place similarly
situated minus the protected area. It has also been observed that the communities in such
remote areas are deprived of banking and credit facilities. It would be no surprise if people
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 258 of 402

would be found practicing barter or dependent on money lenders for credit. Most of the
population is composed of either marginal farmers or daily wage earners.
The communities need to be covered with adequate social and financial security so thatthey may be able to bounce back to normalcy in event of a disaster such as floods,
drought or in event of life threatening disease, or even attack and depredation by wild
animals which could lead to serious consequences of crop damage, loss of life or loss ofproperty. However, the issue remains that since the communities are not banking andthere is no social security, their vulnerabilities are high. In order to provide financial andsocial inclusion the following strategies are suggested:
1. Crop Insurance
2. Cattle Insurance
3. Life Insurance
4. Property Insurance
5. Health Insurance
6. Unconditional Basic Income (UIB) Model
However, it is to be noted that financial and insurance companies are not very keen on
providing services nin such remote areas, and the cost of their services are higher. The
Govt. has also launched several schemes such as Rashtriya Bima Surakhs Yojana(RSBY) which could be leveraged for benefit of the communities.
For the UIB model, the following is proposed:
1. The authority would create a corpus fund for the UIB.
2. The minimum corpus would be Rs. 200.00 crore
3. The UIB would be based on the concept of family as a beneficiary unit.
4. The beneficiaries of the scheme would be each of the families staying in the vicinityof the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve and they have agreed to form an EDC
5. The employees of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve shall also be the beneficiaries of thescheme
6. Each beneficiary would get a membership card.
7. Fund would be raised from various sources including donations, charity
contributions and celebrity contributions, CSR
8. Contributions to the corpus would be exempt from Income Tax.
9. Each beneficiary shall be registered, and the membership list along with certain
family details would be available in public domain.
10. All donations to the corpus would be made public.
11. Each beneficiary shall maintain an exclusive bank account and shall be offered ahigher rate of life insurance and medical insurance cover
12. The interest earnings of the corpus in a given year shall be divided by the numberof beneficiaries equally, and the amount shall transparently be passed to theaccount of the beneficiary where again the fund would automatically get depositedin a wealth multiplier growth fund.
13. Any member of a beneficiary found to indulge in forestry/ wildlife crime or assisting
poachers and criminals shall be barred from future memberships of the corpus fundand no benefit oriented scheme shall be made available to that family.
14. The fund partner bank shall be chosen based on transparent bidding process

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 259 of 402

15.10.5

Alternate Livelihoods

In order to enhance the family income of the communities, it is important to provide
alternative livelihoods. The alternative livelihoods would help supplement the existing
income from conventional agriculture and also would help reduce their dependence onnatural resources. Alternative livelihoods would include:
1. Handicrafts
1. Cane2. Bamboo
3. Wood Craft
4. Pottery
2. Weaving and tailoring units
3. Food Processing and Pickle making units
4. Agriculture and allied services:
1. Organic farming
2. Horticulture
3. Floriculture
4. Spices
5. Bee keeping
6. Aqua culture
5. IT based skills
1. Mobile repair
2. Computer and DTP
3. Electronics equipment repair
4. IT kiosk services
5. Computer graphics and animation
6. Computer Programming
7. Hardware repairs
6. Service sector skills
1. Security services
2. Para medics
3. Hospitality services
4. BPO services
7. Special skills training
1. Mason training
2. Carpentry
3. Electrical repair
4. Driver
5. Automobile repair
8. Soft skill training
9. Foreign languages training
10. Tourism sector skills
The alternative livelihood interventions would include linkages such as:
1. value addition and certification
2. Storage, packaging and processing
3. Branding and market linkages
4. e-Commerce
5. Cluster formation, Guilds, SHGs
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 260 of 402

6. Capital and credit availability
7. Job Melas
8. Organizing fests and melas
Attempt would be made to integrate existing schemes of NRLM, National Skills
Development Council, Ministry of Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) and the Govt. of
Assam schemes of the Employment Generation Mission. Private sector participation in
imparting training, NVQF/ NVEQF certification, in-house/ on the job training, industry
exposure and internship and job placement would be sought. The initiative would also
require S&T interventions at various stages of implementation.
15.10.6

Gender Mainstreaming and Women's Empowerment

Sustainable development calls for reduction of the gender gap in society and to bring in
gender equality. Efforts and programmes in the villages to improve both the position andcondition of women and to fulfill their practical as well as strategic needs should be taken
up. Better health facilities for women and children, making available lady doctors/ visiting
doctors/ ANMs, better education and awareness programmes for women by improving the
educational infrastructure and accessibility. Skilled training programmes for women to help
enhance their income, providing credit, financial inclusion, banking, savings and loan
facilities and other women oriented incentives and schemes of the welfare departments
should be taken up expeditiously for implementation. Strengthening of mahila samitis,
creation of resource centres for imparting specialized training in computers and other skills
such as tailoring, knitting, soap making, handi crafts etc which would help in enhancing
their income and leading to women's empowerment.
15.11 Man Animal Interface Management
One of the biggest challenges that communities on the fringe of protected areas network
have to face is the constant threat of attack / surprise encounter from wild animals. The
communities find it very difficult to cope with such vulnerabilities, especially when muchpromised assistance from the government agencies and the Tiger Reserve authorities
does not reach even several months after the family has suffered the irreparable losses.
The existing systems and processes leave a lot to be desired, and help only in generating
ill feeling towards the wildlife on one hand and the wildlife managers on the other.
Intervention of media can worsen the situation sometimes beyond repair, and tilt thebalance against the Park managers. In the stake holders meetings, this single issue has
been discussed very often. The civil administration of Bokakhat has also suggested thatthe existing processes of compensation are very lengthy and cause unnecessary delays.
Currently, in Kaziranga, immediate assistance to affected families is being provided by part
assistance from the WWF.
The following suggestions are put forth in this regard:
1. The long term growth strategies in the landscape should be animal friendly forwhich planning is required to be done from the very beginning.
2. All the stakeholder villages could be pre-registered with the Tiger Reserveauthorities and should be uniquely identifiable subsequently.
3. A help line should be made operational for the affected/ or threatened families to beable to call for help
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 261 of 402

4. The first attempt should be to avert any damage, for which the public also needs tobe educated to display appropriate behaviour
5. In case of a depredation by wild animal, the assessment team (comprising of Tiger
Reserve authorities, NGOs such as WWF, one Executive Magistrate) should visit
the site and take snaps using still and video camera, and record the coordinates ofthe locations/ damage sites using GPS
6. The local Gaon Burah/ GP President / EDC President should certify the damage on
the spot.
7. A ready made template of damage should be prepared with damages quantified inslabs, which should be printed on a sheet of paper, and can be filled up easily in thefield.
8. Once the assessment is done (which should not be more than 24 hours in normalcases and 48 hours in case there are hurdles in communication or otheremergencies), 80% of compensation fund should be transferred by the DFO (or any
authorized person on his behalf) in next 24 hours.
9. A Third Party Assessment of the efficacy of the system and satisfaction level of thepeople should be carried out annually.
15.12 People's Participation Framework
The decision making process in the landscape would affect the communities residing
therein. The landscape approach has been adopted for the long term conservation andprotection of the rhinoceros in a world which is moving very fast towards unsustainable
development and lopsided economic growth which generates waste and is heading
towards throwing the natural balance of the ecosystems out of order. The landscapeapproach has the flexibility of accommodating the needs of various stakeholders, theelements of nature and wildlife and conservation requirements. However, a commonality of
purpose and sense of togetherness must be achieved so that every stakeholder canunderstand the issues, circumstances and requirements of the other stakeholders. Someof the decisions taken in the landscape scenario may affect some or the other stakeholder
adversely. In such a situation, it is important for every one to understand whether theadversely affected stakeholders has been adequately compensated for within the available
means and processes. The key object in developing a people's participation framework isthat there are host of issues such as livelihoods, climate change, low carbon technologies,
man animal interface and the restrictions on run of the mill development and economic
growth as fall out of being next to Kaziranga, which need to be resolved by a broadconsensus of all concerned keeping the interest of development and conservation side byside. Such a decision making is bound to lead to conflict situations between opposinginterests. An appropriate framework alone can provide the strength to be together incomplex landscape like Kaziranga.
15.12.1

People's Participation Models

Several models of people's participation have been put forth and often quoted, notedamong them being the Periyar model, Poacher Turned Protector model, Zimbabwe model,
Chitwan model of eco-development. However, the situation around Kaziranga is not sosimple that any model lifted from anywhere in the world can be applied here with or without
modification. Most of the Indian models can straight way be rejected on simple grounds
that these do not belong to rhino bearing areas, and hence have little consequence to us.
The reason being that today the stakes involved in rhino poaching are so high that thesePIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 262 of 402

models would not be able to provide that kind of motivation. The Zimbabwe model andalong with it most of the African country models would not work in India, just because theAfrican models are based mostly on wildlife trade and hunting, both of which are banned inIndia. The concept of “Use it or lose it” does not work in case of wildlife in India. The
Chitwan model which is based on community development and community involvement isa good model to emulate, but beyond that there are no similarities. The population aroundKaziranga is multi ethnic, multi lingual and mixed. Each of the communities have different
cultural values, aspirations, food habits and social institutions. The communities are also
multi religious. Moreover, the anguish of the people towards the Forest Department ishistorical in nature and embedded in local nuances and perceptions of what is right andwhat is wrong. The Department shall have to walk extra miles to come any where closer tothe people. The trust of the people can be won back only in course of time depending
upon the sincerity and clarity of purpose and transparency shown in decision making.
15.12.2

Companion Modeling Approach

The Companion Modeling approach was developed after a series of field based
experiments which led to the first draft in 2001 by a team of scientists at CIRAD. The
model was revised in April, 2004. In this approach, first a model of a real world situation isconceptualized (it really does not matter how good or bad the model is), and then themodel is put forth before the stakeholders for discussion and feedback. The feedback isused to refine the model further, and then the revised model is again subjected to thesame process. It is a multi stakeholder modeling approach based on repetitive back andforth steps between the model and the field situation. The companion modeling approach
is well suited for complexity and openness of systems because:
1. It considers as legitimate and takes into account view points which might be seen
as contradictory
2. It organizes the compulsory questioning of any new element introduced into theapproach
3. During each loop it confronts new external elements.

The companion modeling approach is very well suited for decision making in the
Kaziranga landscape, as there are various stakeholders with conflicting interests,
competing for the same resources, and commonality must be achieved at the end in thelarger interest of long term protection of rhino.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 263 of 402

15.12.3

Micro Plans

Micro Plans hold the key to sustainable development. These plans are community plans
based bottom to top approach in planning and development. These plans reflect the grassroot level needs of the people, as they are prepared by the communities through aparticipatory planning approach. Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools include:
1. Transect walk
2. Time line
3. Social mapping
4. Chapati diagram
5. Ranking (such as wealth ranking)6. Seasonality
7. Matrix scoring
8. Group discussion
These tools aid in catching the true scenario relating to the resources, vulnerabilities,
capacities, needs and gaps at the local community level. Based on the need assessment
and gap analysis conducted by the community, a plan, called the micro plan or community
plan, is prepared detailing the priorities, resources, gaps and funding requirements of thecommunity. Such type of micro planning is a people's plan and is transparent and holds
accountable the community stakeholders and the program managers and public officials.
The people's participation continues at all levels namely from the stage of formulation,
implementation and monitoring and evaluation. If properly conducted, it bears the best
results of community development, leading to ownership of program and assets generated
thereof. The communities benefit by taking up more responsibilities, being equal partners
in the development process.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 264 of 402

15.12.4

Capacity Building and IEC

Capacity building entails enhancing people's abilities to understand, analyze and develop
their capabilities towards handling different situations that arise while undertaking
development activities. Orientation, awareness, training and skill development are some of
the methods used to build the capacity of communities to be able to plan and implement
development activities at the local level. For orientation and awareness, there is arequirement for developing IEC (Information, Education and Communication) materials
such as posters, brochures, handbooks, pocket guides, audio visuals. A proper
dissemination strategy for creating awareness needs to be chalked out. Some of theeffective dissemination strategies in rural areas have been:
1. Street plays
2. Local theatre
3. Folk songs
4. Folk dances
5. Display at melas and market places
6. Demonstration in schools
7. Dhulias
It is important to identify the stakeholders and target groups first. Based on the target
groups, different training modules need to be developed. These modules could be
developed for the youth, women, school children, farmers, front line staff etc. Different
areas that would require development of training modules and IEC materials are:
1. Livelihood and skill development
2. Preparation of micro plans
3. PRA methods
4. Developing and translating IEC materials
5. Use of technology and equipment
6. Science and technology interventions
7. New technology/ green technology interventions
8. Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
9. Social Audit
10. Project planning and implementation

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 265 of 402

CHAPTER 16
16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
This Chapter covers certain overarching policy, legal, protocol and programme strategies
covering the various aspects of rhino habitat, anti poaching activities, implementation of
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The various existing provisions of policy and law have been
already discussed along with certain provisions from the rhino bearing countries in theworld. Based on the discussions in the stakeholders meetings, and the material presented
in Chapter 5, the policy level interventions have been suggested in this Chapter.
16.1

Proposed State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972

The Government of Assam has made laudable efforts in amending the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972, vide Notification no. LGL.107/2008/33 Dt. 19 Th October, 2010 through the
Wildlife (Protection) (Assam Amendment) Act, 2009. This amendment is in respect ofsection 51 which lays down punishment under the various proviso of the Act. However,after several round of stakeholder meeting it was felt that fast track courts should be
introduced. The experiment of the Nepal Government was also examined whereinmagisterial powers have been awarded to the “Chief Warden” [equivalent of the Field
Director] and territorial DFOs. Having carefully studied various aspects of the Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972, the following premises are being put forth for two key new
amendments in the Act. These amendments could be again State amendments applicablewithin the State of Assam.
Since 1982 till date more than 640 rhinos have been lost to the poachers. Poaching is no
more a localized phenomenon in a world now well connected with communication
networks, mobile and Internet. The perpetrators of the rhino poaching crime have been
constantly innovating and changing their strategies compared to the rather slow process ofchange and adoption in the Government. The poachers took full advantage of all the loop
holes and the democratic process of natural justice and slow and almost non existentconviction. Due to high international demand, they have been not only able to amass great
ill gotten wealth, but also got the necessary fuel to keep their illegal industry alive with new
recruits. Today the situation has reached a level that the poachers gang seemed to begetting immune to legal action, as they are able to fill the gaps created by arrests andkillings of gang members, faster with new recruits. These can be stopped by adopting a
two pronged strategy of keeping as many poachers as possible under arrest for as long atime as possible; and secondly by starting to investigate and confiscate the ill gotten
properties. These would surely hit the poachers hard and give a very strong message inthe society to keep away from rhino poaching.
In order to give shape to this two pronged strategy, amendments are proposed by way of
inserting a new section 54A after section 54 under Chapter VI “Prevention and Detection of
offences” of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 by conferring powers to pass sentences incertain cases to the officers not below the rank of Chief Conservator of Forests. Secondly,
amendment of section 58A is proposed to include “persons suspected” to have gotten
property derived from illegal hunting and trade. It is expected that these amendments
shall greatly impact the current poaching scenario in the State, as the threat perception
against action under law is currently very low, which would shoot up greatly once the newprovisions come in force.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 266 of 402

16.1.1 Proposed Amendment under Chapter VI
The following are the proposed amendments under Chapter VI of the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972:
1. A new section namely section 54A shall be inserted below section 54 as proposed
below:“54A. Power to Pass Sentences in Certain Offences- (1) The State Government
may, by notification, appoint Adjudicating Officers not below the rank of a Chief
Conservator of Forests to hear and dispose complaint cases of offences against
this Act where the offence committed is in relation to any animal specified in
Schedule I or Part II of Schedule II where the offence relates to hunting in or outside
the boundary of a sanctuary or a National Park or altering the boundaries of asanctuary or a National Park:
Provided that any punishment awarded by the Adjudicating Officers shall not
exceed imprisonment for a term more than seven years or with fine which shall not
be less than fifty thousand rupees, but may not exceed more than five lakh rupees
or with both;
Provided further that in the case of a second or subsequent offence of thenature mentioned in this sub section, the term of imprisonment shall not be morethan fourteen years and also with fine which shall not be less than seventy five
thousand rupees.
(2) The State Government shall appoint at least one Adjudicating Officer for each of
the zones namely Upper Assam, Northern Assam, Central Assam, Hills Areas,
Barak Valley and Lower Assam specifying their headquarters and jurisdiction
depending upon the origin of offence pertaining to the sanctuaries and National
Parks.
(3) The Adjudicating Officers shall have the powers of the court with original
jurisdiction and shall follow the same procedure as the Court of Sessions.
(4) An appeal may be filed before the High Court having jurisdiction over the placeof origin of the offence within thirty days of issue of order of the Adjudicating Officer.
2. In section 51B(3), the following words shall be inserted at the end “or by an
Adjudicating Officer”
16.1.2 Proposed Amendment under Chapter VIA
The following are the proposed amendments under Chapter VIA of the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972:
1. Under section 58A, sub section (d) to be inserted which shall read “any person who
is suspected to be or believed to be involved in or has committed an offence against
this Act; and against whom any of the officers referred to in section 50(1) in writing
having informed the competent authority”;

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 267 of 402

2. Under section 58A, sub section (e) to be inserted which shall read “any person
holding or believed to be holding property derived from illegal hunting and trade inwild animals and or wildlife in contravention of the provisions of this Act”;
3. Under section 58A, sub section (f) to be inserted which shall read “every associateof a person referred to in clause (d)”.
4. In section 58C, sub section (1), the words “to whom this Chapter applies” shall beomitted.
5. In section 58C, sub section (2), the word ”six” shall be replaced by the word
“twelve”.
6. In section 58C, sub section (2), the words “served a notice under section 58H by
the competent authority or” shall be inserted after the words “from the date on which
he was”; and the words “whichever date is earlier.” shall be inserted after the words“illegal hunting and trade of wildlife and its products”; and the full stop at the end of
the original sentence shall be replaced by a comma.
7. Below the section 58U, a new section 58 UA to be be inserted as, “Proceeds to go
to the Foundation- The proceeds, if any, arising out of sale or disposal of any
property under this Chapter shall be deposited in the accounts of the respective
Tiger conservation foundation duly constituted as per the provisions of this Act.”
16.2

Applying Provisions of Sarai Act, 1867

Under the provisions of the Sarai Act, 1867, the following actions are proposed, to be
implemented by the concerned Deputy Commissioner of the District concerned:1. All hotels, dhabas and lodges within the Kaziranga landscape should be registeredunder the Sarai Act
2. Each such registered owner shall be required to maintain a register of visitors with
Photo ID proof of the residents along with details such as nationality, permanent
address, profession and purpose of visit among other details
3. All the paying guest accommodations also need to be registered in a similar fashion
4. Prior to registration, land use change provisions and zonation provisions should beverified from the Kaziranga landscape Authority.
5. Eco-tourism households also to be registered.
16.3

Wildlife Crime and Prosecution

A detailed discussion on the wildlife crime and prosecution has been provided in Chapter
5. It is no denying that due to several reasons put together wildlife crime prosecution isvery poor in the State, and it applied very well to Kaziranga where on an average 20-30
rhinos are being poached annually, more than 20-50 persons are getting arrested andabout 5-10 poachers are getting killed during exchange of fire with forest personnel.
However, there has been virtually nil prosecution since 2006. In order to remedy the issues
at hand effectively, four levels of interventions are being suggested in the paragraphs
below.
16.3.1 Removal of Legal Bottlenecks
There are certain legal bottlenecks which have not been taken of as yet. These must be
remedied forthwith by issuing notifications by the State Government:
1. No notification of the authorized officer, being an officer not below the rank ofAssistant Conservator of Forests, authorized by the State Government in this behalf
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 268 of 402

under section 50(8) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 to issue search warrants,
to enforce attendance of witnesses, to compel the discovery and production of
documents and material objects and to receive and record evidence. In absence of
this, there is no locus standii of the investigating officers till date.
2. No notification under section 54 (1) to empower the Chief wildlife warden or any
officer of a rank not below the rank of a Deputy Conservator of Forests, to accept
from any person against whom a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed
an offence against this Act, payment of a sum of money by way of composition of
the offence which such a person is suspected to have committed.
3. No notification under section 58D of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 to authorize
any officer not below the rank of Chief Conservator of Forests to perform thefunctions of the Competent Authority under Chapter VIA entitled “Forfeiture ofproperty derived from illegal hunting and trade” of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
4. No Notification under section 58E of an officer not below the rank of Deputy
Inspector General of Police duly authorized by the Central Government, or as thecase may be, the State Government who shall on receipt of complaint from thecompetent authority about any person having illegally acquired property, shallproceed to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying any property illegallyacquired.
5. Notification under 58G may be issued to appoint officers not below the rank ofConservator of Forests to perform the functions of an Administrator.
6. No notification under section 58N whereby the State Government is required toconstitute an Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property consisting of a Chairman andsuch number of other members being the officers of the State Government not
below the rank of a Principal Secretary to the Government, as the State
Government may think fit, to be appointed by that Government for hearing appeals
against the orders made under section 58F, section 58I, sub section (1) of section
58K or section 58L.
The Chapter VIA assumes great significance in view of the huge amount of moneys
involved in the illegal transactions of rhino horn trade. Procuring motorcycles, vehicles,
landed property, building houses, buying flats are some of the noted activities of thepoachers which must be confiscated forthwith. However, there is a bottleneck in section
58A which talks of confiscation of properties of only persons convicted of an offence
punishable under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 with imprisonment for a term of three
years or more. It implies that the perpetrators of heinous crime such as rhino poaching
would continue to amass illegally gotten wealth, and the law enforcing machinery, despite
having intelligence inputs to this effect, shall have to wait for conviction to take place andsupposing that the conviction was only for two years and six months, and thus, the convict
shall continue to enjoy his ill-gotten property after serving the jail term of two and halfyears, and meanwhile while he is serving jail term, his near and dear ones would continue
enjoying that property. This itself would be a great incentive to the poachers. Since section
58J spells out clearly that in any proceedings under this Chapter [Chapter VIA of the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972] the burden of proving that any property specified in thenotice served under section 58H is not illegally acquired property shall be on the person
affected, there is no reason as to why the Competent Authority cannot initiate suo motocase under section 58H irrespective whether the person concerned is convicted or not.
Secondly, if the person is convicted of a crime under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 269 of 402

with imprisonment for a term of three years or more, all property in his name should standconfiscated automatically, and notice should be issued to others as specified under section
58A sub section (b) and (c), for proceeding under section 58H. The section 58H should beapplicable, in addition, to any suspect or any person arrested or any person accused ofcommitting a crime punishable under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, and parallel
proceedings must run under section 58E, 58F, 58I and 58K, 58L and 58M. Therefore,
based on the discussion here, a State Amendment of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
has been proposed at the beginning of this Chapter.
16.3.2 Removal of Procedural and Administrative Bottlenecks
At present, the same set of officers are engaged in protection duties, crime scene
investigation and prosecution. In between they have to depose before the magistrates, indifferent districts, for cases which they have filed in their earlier positions in previous
postings. These roles need to be separated and the wildlife crime scene investigations,filing offence reports and prosecution should be segregated. The following proposal ismade in this regard:
1. There is requirement of posting three dedicated ACFs who are well trained inwildlife crime scene investigations, interrogation techniques and use ofpsychological duress to extract information from apprehended accused. They
should be posted with the office of the Field Director.
2. There should be also three DCFs attached to the Field Director to deal with issues
arising out of section 50, 54, 58A to 58Y, and wildlife crime scene investigations.
3. Two conservators may be attached to the Field Director
4. On the other hand, the DFO, EAWL should be provided with three additional ACFs
to deal with prosecution of cases.
5. A Public Prosecutor should be appointed for the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve
exclusively.
6. The Kaziranga National Park/ Tiger Reserve authorities should be allowed to hire
services of professionally competent lawyers having expertise in criminal law andwildlife law to fight every single case of wildlife crime. They may be termed asSpecial Public Prosecutors.
7. In all cases of violation of the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972,
specific complaint cases must be filed by the authorized officer in the competentcourt of law.
8. Only in case of seizure of arms, or encounters where a poacher is killed in crossfire, an FIR should be lodged in the nearest Police Station. However, any progress
gathered or evidence collected by a police officer may be called for the authorized
officer under section 50(8)(c) to substantiate his investigations and furtherance ofgathering more evidence which may be produced before the trial court.
9. In case of rhino poaching or poaching of any wildlife, information may also be madeavailable to the local police, as often arms are involved in poaching. However, filingan information report with the police does not absolve the forest authorities of theirprimary responsibilities under section 50(8).
10. It may be noted that FIR is a First Information Report to be given to the nearest
police station under section 154 CrPC if a cognizable offence is committed. Wildlife
crime, if punishable with imprisonment of three years or more is a cognizableoffence, and if a forest officer has become aware that such an offence has beencommitted in his jurisdiction, he as a law abiding citizen of the country and in the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 270 of 402

larger interest of preventing further criminal activities in his jurisdiction, may file an
FIR. However, there is no mention of the word FIR under the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972. If an action is required to be taken under this Act, he has to believe that
an offence has been committed against this Act. It is clear under section 50 (1),that any forest officer or any police officer not below the rank of a sub inspector,
may, if he has reasonable grounds for believing that any person has committed an
offence against the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 may proceed further, but a court
will take cognizance of the complaint against this Act only if such a person has
already been authorized under section 55 of the Act. Unless there is a specificauthorization in this behalf by the State Government subject to such conditions as
may be specified by that Government under section 55(c), nobody other than the
Director of the Tiger Reserve [Kaziranga was notified as Tiger Reserve only in2007], and the Chief Wildlife Warden are authorized to do so. However, the Govt. of
Assam has issued a notification vide Notification No. FRW.35/87/Pt-I/60 dt. 4 thMarch, 1994. The police officer also shall have to file a complaint case under
section 55 to a trial court as per the provisions of section 200 of CrPC, 1973,
without which a trial court cannot take cognizance of an offence against this Act.
However, section 56 of the Act allows for application of other Acts if an accused forany act or omission which constitutes an offence against this Act or from being
liable under such other law. This implies that the accused can be separately tried
under the Arms Act as well by the police. Therefore, filing of an FIR at best can be
an additional activity to enable the police machinery to take cognizance of the caseand start investigations on his own.
11. It is to be noted that the powers under section 50(8) to issue search warrants, toenforce attendance of witnesses, to compel the discovery and production of
documents and material objects and to receive and record evidence is vested onlywith the authorized officer, not below the rank of an Assistant Conservator ofForests duly notified by the State Government.
12. It has been observed that forest officers invariably file an FIR and virtually do
nothing thereafter. However, the provisions of section 51 (1) which states that any
person who contravenes any provision of this Act except Chapter VA and section 38
or any rule or order made thereunder or..., shall be guilty of an offence against thisAct, and shall on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may
exceed to three years or with fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees
or with both. Non exercise of powers under section 58(8) by an authorized officer
may attract the provisions of section 51(1). Such a call may be taken under section
55 by persons specified under sub section (ab), (ac), (b) or (c) of the Wildlife(Protection) act, 1972. In event of such a situation arising, provisions of section 60of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 may not apply, as such acts of negligence shallbe deemed not to have been done in good faith.
13. It is also to be noted that the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, though under Chapter
VI has the title of the Chapter as “Prevention and Detection of Offences” hasnothing seemingly under its garb from section 50 to 58, that is preventive in nature.
The section 50(1) only talks only of “..believing that any person has committed an
offence against this Act....”. This actually means that while taking up cases forprosecution, support may have to be taken from the major criminal acts such as the
Indian Penal Code section 120A which defines criminal conspiracy, section 172-190

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 271 of 402

IPC defines the contempt of the lawful authority of public servants just to mention afew.
14. The Charge to be put before the trial court must be as per the provisions of section
211 and 214 of the CrPC. The Charge shall be submitted within 30 to 60 days ofoccurrence of the offence without fail.
15. Case diaries have traditionally not been maintained by Forest Officers as the forest
offence cases are filed as Complaint Cases under section 200 of the CrPC, 1973.
However, the trial courts have been demanding case diaries of late, in absence of
which getting accused on remand is proving difficult. In view of the above, it is
proposed that the authorized officers shall maintain in all cases a Forest Offence
Case Diary (FOCD) which shall contain all details with date wise entries of actions
initiated, material evidence gathered (with serial no of tags/ identification marks etc.,
serially numbered photographs, serially numbered CDs/ Pen drives containing
electronic evidence or video or audio footage with file names and file properties withcreation and access dates etc), search warrants issued, warrants for attendance of
witnesses, or call for records and material objects etc, and communication sent toother departments/ law enforcing agencies for further investigation/ collection ofevidence. It should also invariably be done even if the offence is or has been
compounded under section 54.
16. Every crime scene record (not only rhino poaching alone) such as illegal fishing,entry into the Tiger Reserve or the National Park, scene of encounter, or alterationof boundary pillars or killing of wildlife must invariably contain a map of the site withnearest boundary indications and GPS coordinates along with photographs having
imprint of date and time.
17. The Kaziranga National Park/ Tiger Reserve invariably does not have visible
boundary pillars on its boundary which is clearly visible from a distance. The
boundary pillars not only keep the boundary intact, but also act as legal instrumentin proving that the accused entered the area willfully ignoring the clearly visible
boundary pillars with intentions to commit an offence punishable under the Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972. Therefore, boundary pillar fixation with embedded solar LED
for night time identification must be fixed as a short term measure all around the
Tiger reserve/ National Park. The boundary pillar should not be less than 1mx1m at
the base and of 1m in height in pyramidal shape with tip being not less than
0.30mX0.30m. It should be embedded with solar LED for flashing at night on all
sides and on the top.
18. Regular training on wildlife crime investigation and prosecution should be
conducted for all concerned wildlife staff and officers.
19. Orientation of the Magistrates and trial courts should also be conducted at least
twice in a year so that the judges can appreciate the nuances of wildlife crime andunderstand the gravity of the damages inflicted by criminals against theenvironment and forests.
20. There is no database of suspected or noted criminals. In absence of such a system
it becomes difficult to proceed in any case of poaching. Therefore, the following
additional recommendations are being made for creating a comprehensive
database of suspected rhino poachers, accomplices etc, which shall apply toapprehended persons in poaching related cases whether involved in rhino poachingcrime or not:PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 272 of 402

1. Photograph of the person from front, back and sides, including face blow ups onfour sides to be taken
2. His physical body characteristics such as color of hair, color of the pupil of theeye, height, weight, overall built profile, chest (normal and expanded), length ofhands, length of legs to be recorded
3. Any feature such as extra fingers/ toes, missing fingers/ toes, body deformity,
visible cut marks on the body, birth marks to be noted and photographed.
4. 10 finger prints to be scanned using a finger print scanner as well as manual
method by applying ink
5. Foot size and contour to be recorded by taking plaster cast foot print
6. DNA profiling of the person to be done
7. Facial recognition parameters of the person to be captured using facialrecognition software
8. All this to be stored electronically and physically in secure manner andcatalogued for easy retrieval.
9. In event of a crime, the data obtained from the crime scene would be matchedwith the data available, and a guess list of possible accused involved in thepoaching should be prepared and circulated to all concerned for further
investigation and arrest.
21. Every Range Office should have one or more cells and interrogation rooms whichshould be fully secure and away from any public view.
16.3.3 Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation Methodology
The current wildlife crime scene investigation methodology is very rudimentary and helps
only the cause of the poachers. The wildlife crime scene investigation modernization has
been discussed separately in the next paragraph. Here the procedural aspects alone havebeen suggested:
1. The crime scene, or Place of Occurrence (PO) when first detected, especially incase of poaching, must be left undisturbed. The team spotting it, must return backcarefully the way they entered ensuring that no further damage is caused to thecrime scene.
2. Once at safe distance, an assessment should immediately be made whether thepoachers are still around, scooted or any major visible object they left behind (which
may be helpful in tracking the culprits using the dog squad). Accordingly urgent
message shall be passed for pressing the dog squad, if workable, and the wildlife
crime investigation officer to be present on the scene in shortest possible time.
Exact location of the crime scene with GPS coordinates should be passed on
immediately.
3. Until the next team arrives, the patrol team should guard the crime scene.
4. Immediately the concerned wildlife crime investigation officer (which the Field
Director/ Chief Wildlife Warden may so designate), an officer not below the rank ofAssistant Conservator of Forests, assisted by two or more trained junior wildlife
crime investigation officers (not below the rank of Forester I), should be contacted
to arrive at the crime scene and start investigations. Till the wildlife crime
investigation officer (WCIO) and his team does not arrive on the spot, the local
patrol team should ensure that no one tampers with the crime scene.
5. The WCIO and his team shall arrive on scene take photographs of the crime scenefrom at least four directions (if terrain permits).
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 273 of 402

6. The WCIO must ensure that he has with him all necessary materials, tools andequipment and requisite forms and paper etc. as per the checklist approved by the
Field Director.
7. If the scene has potential for dog squad based tracking. First preference should begiven to the dog squad team. The team should be carefully led to the crime scene
and necessary objects required for the dog to follow scent should be allowed to bepicked up.
8. Thereafter, he shall proceed to cordon off an area not less than 20m around the kill.
9. He shall use flags/ improvised flags to mark points of interest and record theirdetails in his diary. Each such flag shall be preferably numbered, or numberedcards can be placed below the flags.
10. All evidence shall be systematically collected and kept in designated containers/
packets, each of which shall be tagged and numbered.
11. Each crime scene shall be assigned a unique number for Kaziranga as a whole,and a sketch map of the crime scene shall be prepared.
12. Each label shall additionally contain the unique crime scene number, date and timeand code of the WCIO.
13. The GPS reading of the centre of the crime scene to be recorded.
14. Measurements of the various relevant distances should be recorded
15. Measurement of the killed animal should be taken (say body length, shoulder to leg
length, length and width of the skull mouth to neck and top and bottom etc., lengthof the ears etc.)
16. All measurements must be taken on horizontal plane and not along any surface
contour.
17. Inspect the carcass and look for wounds, cut marks and bullet injuries
18. Use HHMD and DSMD to detect bullets
19. DNA sample of the dead rhino should be taken as per RhoDIS guidelines
20. For all visible bullet wounds, direction of bullet entry may be indicated by inserting
flags in the visible wounds with easy hands.
21. Collection of human DNA, finger-prints, hair or other body parts/ saliva from objects
such as used water bottle should be carried out after careful examination.
22. Lifting of foot prints using denture plaster should be carried out, if footprints areavailable on the crime scene.
23. The crime scene should be photographed finally from at least four directions if
possible
24. There are possibilities that in across fire one or more poachers may get killed nearor in the vicinity of the rhino killed. In such a situation, the WCIO shall note therelevant facts, but shall not touch any material objects such as bags etc. found on
the spot. The nearest Police shall be informed accordingly to arrive at the scene.
25. Once the WCIO is satisfied that there is no more clue available without further
damaging the crime scene, he shall call for the postmortem of the animal killed
including necessity of turning around the animal for further examination.
26. No persons other than forest/ police or other investigating officers duly authorizedunder the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 shall be allowed entry to the crime scene.
27. A video footage of the final crime scene prior to postmortem may be released to themedia by the Range Officer of the concerned range where the crime has occurred.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 274 of 402

Dog Squad Protocol:
The following basic principles must be observed in a crime scene:
1. Whoever happens to spot the crime scene must not damage the crime scene any
further, and should not even go near any object.
2. Until the dog squad arrives, no object should be touched.
3. All effort should be made to ensure that the dog squad arrives at the earliest
possible time.
4. The dog squad must be accompanied by at least one to two sections of alert and fit
and well armed AFPF and or Armed Police Battalion such as Assam battalion. The
young members of the Battalion are found to be most suited to accompany the dog
squad.
5. The AFPF jawans accompanying the dog squad must use BP jackets and helmets.
The same would also apply to the armed police jawans.
6. The team must carry equipment such as one or two thermal scanners/ binoculars
7. The local police must be kept ready in advance to accompany along with sufficient
force in case the track is likely to lead to any civil/village areas
8. Once the dog squad team departs, investigations should be continued at the crime
scene.
9. No unauthorized persons to accompany the dog squad during the operation.
Postmortem Protocol:
The following postmortem protocol is suggested for Kaziranga Tiger Reserve:
1. The Field Veterinary Officer (FVO) or any other such officer authorized by the Field
Director/ DFO, EAWL alone shall carry the postmortem of wild animals in andaround Kaziranga Tiger Reserve
2. The FVO shall ascertain whether the Place of Occurrence is a wildlife crime scene
or not. It is is crime scene, he shall first ensure that the WCIO has completed his
investigations and given clearance for postmortem
3. The FVO shall make his own notes of the physical condition of the carcass andrecord measurements, and take his own photographs of the carcass or close of any
body part or may cause turning or the carcass for further investigation.
4. He shall record all the physical description of the animal and take appropriate
measurements.
5. For every wild animal physical measurements to be recorded by the FVO and the
WCIO shall be on preprinted art paper of sufficient thickness having the necessary
outline sketch of the animal and some of its body parts. Each such sheet shall be
serially numbered
6. For animals killed using bullets, every effort should be made to recover the bullet(s)causing the fatal wound(s), if required, by using DSMD.
7. Samples of viscera/ fluid should be collected to study if, otherwise, the animal was
suffering from any infection or if it was acting as a carrier of any specific germs.
8. Every attempt should be made to ascertain the actual cause of death.
9. All samples should be analyzed in the facility to be created for this purpose at
Kaziranga. Only if all tests fail, sample may be sent to labs having better facilities.
10. The FVO shall submit his report in two parts. The first report shall be submitted
within 24/48 hours. The second report with detailed observations may be submittedwith all documentary evidence and laboratory reports as soon as all the reports arereceived.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 275 of 402

11. If there is a observable trend within a species or within an geographical area, theFVO shall make further investigations and submit a separate detailed report to the
DFO/ Field Director expressing his views and suggestions.
Post Gun Shot Protocol:
A lot of firing incidents keep happening within the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, some fired inself defense against wild animals, some fired in self defense against poachers, some
accidentally fired and some fired by miscreants either to poach a rhino or to ward off anapproaching animal too close to them or even accidental fire. With the existing network
system, it takes anything from a few minutes to several hours to establish the source thegun shot. In the past there has been a practice of replying to the gun shots of poachers by
all those camps that heard the gun shot originally. Though it proved initially very effective,
it had done more harm than good in the long run. It added to the confusion and direction of
the original shot, and allowed sufficient time for the poachers to decamp with the horn. In
view of the above, the following strategy is being followed and requires rigorous
implementation:
1. No one to fire on hearing a gun shot
2. To establish the gun shot origins on wireless by asking the nearest camps if they
fired/ heard the sound.
3. If fired by any field staff, he is required to report immediately. However, often it may
not happen due to the field situations or lack of communication. This introduces anelement of delay and uncertainty. However, he has to report at the next best
available opportunity.
4. If established to be an enemy shot, all the neighbouring camps to surround thearea, and close all possible escape routes, and lay siege/ ambush until further
orders.
5. All concerned to take positions at vulnerable points. The operation may continue forseveral hours and days.
6. One or two (even three) big teams are then sent as search parties to flush out
miscreants/ apprehend them.
7. Fire exchange may take place. All teams prepared and ready to fire.
8. The search parties may or may not find any carcass. The focus is solely on locating
the poachers
Currently this strategy is difficult to put in full action due to lack of proper equipment andtechnologies. The poachers have an advantage as they can keep watch from vantage
points and be still in hiding. As modernization of the forces happens, this strategy would
yield good results. Already using this strategy, highest number of poachers have been
killed during this year, compared to any other year before.
16.3.4 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigations
Currently the crime scene investigation is very poor and lacks technology. It is based on
mostly visual observations and random guesses. Some of the new introductions oftechnology include use of HHMD, DSMD since January, 2014. The only other innovative
introduction is the Dog Squad which became a part of the Kaziranga arsenal in January,
2014. The following suggestions are being made for modernizing wildlife crime scene
investigations:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 276 of 402

1. A checklist of the investigation toolkit to be approved by the Field Director based on
the available technologies, preparedness and training imparted to the field staff.
2. The checklist to be revised from time to time to improve it and make it more
effective.
3. All the concerned staff to be trained on the toolkit.
4. The following equipment must be part of the kit as of now:
1. HHMD
2. DSMD
3. Digital SLR camera 35mm with 25-75 mm zoom lens
4. Digital Video Camera
5. GPS
6. 100-150 m of Crime Scene tape/ special nylon rope with tags
7. 30 m retractable Steel tape
8. 3 m retractable steel tape
9. Laser Range Finder
10. Lithium Ion Battery Pack
11. Scissors (Big and small)/ Tweezers / Pliers/ Scalpel
12. Magnetic Compass
13. Binoculars
14. Numbered cards (1-30)
15. Ruler/ Pencil/ Eraser/ Sharpener
16. Maps of the area
17. Animal measurement printed sheets
18. Magnifying Glass
19. Hand Gloves
20. Self sealing Polythene bags of different sizes
21. Dental Plaster (15 kg)
22. Spoons
23. Transparent tape (narrow/ wide) [preferably KNP pre-printed]
24. Iron Flag sticks (20 in number)
25. “DO NOT DISTURB” sign
26. Sticky pre-printed labels with barcodes
5. In the next revision of this checklist, the following target items would be captured:
1. Human finger prints
2. Human hair and other human tissues
3. Human finger prints from the body of the animal
6. Once the RhoDIS system is introduced, the above kit would be further modified tocapture samples for rhino DNA profiling
7. Another kit for the postmortem would also be introduced
16.3.5 Implementing RhoDISThe Rhino DNA Index System (RhoDIS) has been developed over a period of almost ninestarting from the year 2000 by the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory (VGL) at the Faculty of
Veterinary Science of the University of Pretoria. The project finally matured in 2009
providing a method to obtain an individual DNA profile from any part of the rhino horn sothat it can be linked at any point of time to the animal that it was taken from. The method
has been successfully tested to detect many horn components in small quantities andfinally bring the criminals involved to the court of law for successful prosecution. AlreadyPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 277 of 402

several convictions have already happened based on RhoDIS system. More than 1700
rhinoceros forensic cases have been received by the VGL since June, 2010. The RhoDIS
maintains a clean database of all rhino DNA profiles which is based on the CODIS systemof human DNA profiles maintained by the FBI. The advantage is that the DNA profile of thepoached rhino can be collected during the first wildlife crime scene investigations itself.
The samples are sent to VGL for DNA profiling and indexing. Whenever a rhino horn or
any other object having some parts of rhino horn are caught by the investigators, the DNA
profile of that object is also done. Thereafter, the new profile is matched in the databasefor possible matches of any record of a poached rhino. On successful matching, it
isestablished that this rhino horn came from that specific rhino that was poached, or theobject contains parts of the horn which ultimately came from that particular rhino. RhoDIS
is able to establish direct link between the horn and the poaching incident.
A team of experts on RhoDIS namely Rodrick H Potter and Cindy Harper came to
Guwahati ad Kaziranga on 26th to 29th May, 2014, and gave training to the wildlife staff on
wildlife crime scene investigations and the use of RhoDIS. The following is suggested in
respect of RhoDIS:
1. A Genetic Analysis laboratory should be officially recognized for carrying out
RhoDIS related works.
2. The Staff of the laboratory should be well trained in RhoDIS
3. The WCCB or the NTCA should maintain the Indian RhoDIS database
4. The Indian RhoDIS database should also be made available to other law enforcing
agencies in the World. However, all security precautions should be taken whileallowing others to connect. No untrusted connection should be allowed.
5. The NIC can host the RhoDIS database in a very secure environment, and should
ensure that the system is beyond the reach of hackers
6. The Govt. of Assam may set up a Genetics lab or use one in PPP mode.
7. In all wildlife poaching cases, DNA sample collection from the crime scene must be
made mandatory, once the genetics lab is certified by VGL.
8. DNA profiling test must be conducted for all rhino horns caught/ confiscated16.3.6 Inter Agency Coordination
It is to be clearly understood by all that rhino poaching is an organized crime involving
national and international gangs who work in close coordination with each other. It hascomponents of arms smuggling, money laundering, cross border smuggling, terrorism andinternational illegal wildlife trade. The rhino trade, as revealed in some interrogations ofpoachers arrested, is multilayered and translational. It is depicted graphically below:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 278 of 402

The diagram is explained in more details in the Table below:
Level Key Role

Activities

Area of Operation Remarks

1

Poaching

Field Guide, Shooting, Park.
Hacking, Accomplices tocross river or spot astray rhino

2

Organizing

Organizeshooters, Outside the Park, Organizers
but within 15-20 km themselves may
arms, escort weapons
not enter theradiusPark, and send
his key man tolead the team.
The shooting
arms are kept
separately

3

1st Level trade

Pick up the horn for Small towns
smuggling4

2nd Level trade

Pick up the horn for final Possibly Dimapur,
destinations
Itanagar, Imphal

5

3rd Level

Horn moved
countryout

Shooters mostly
come from
Nagaland,Manipur,
Arunachal
PradeshRouting happens
through privatetaxi, bus or trainof Trans-border[It needs to be mentioned that in some cases, local hunters who are expert shooters such as Karbi / NDFB Militants (alsopossibly some local persons working in various armed forces may be taking the risk of becoming shooters as theearnings are handsome and attractive)]

Therefore, it is clear from the Table above that people from the neighbouring states are
involved in not only trade but also in shooting/ poaching of the animals. Several poachers
shot dead inside the Park during encounters have been found to be unidentified Naga/
Paite/ Kuki / Arunachali tribesmen. They are engaged by the local organizers who on one
hand either already have illegal/ smuggled weapons or hire weapons from militants by wayof rentals on daily basis or buy weapons in markets such as Dimapur. The arms arehanded over to the shooters at the time of the operation only when the team is inside thePark. Once the rhino horn is removed, it is kept with the leader of the team only. The
leader is either himself the organizer or a confidant of the organizer.
Most of the activities take place outside the Park boundaries in civil areas. The mostimportant observation is that if about 15 km area around the Park is sanitized of illegalarms, poaching would drop down to almost nil. However, in a state which is infested withso many active militant groups and many surrendered groups who have been allowed toretain their weapons with them, nothing much can be expected in this direction. The
Police, the para military forces, the armed forces also have to perform their duties andcontribute their full might in controlling illegal arms movement around the Kaziranga Tiger
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 279 of 402

Reserve. Should the forest personnel somewhere be blamed for their failure to protect therhinos, more than equal share should also be passed onto Police, Para Military Forces andthe Army along with other law enforcing agencies for their failure and failure of theirintelligence network to prevent the elements, that contribute more than 80% of the time,energy and space towards organizing a poaching event, from culminating into killing of arhino. If the challenges faced by these agencies in the civil areas is very tough andunsurmountable and beyond control, then the hurdles inside the Park/ Tiger Reserve aremany orders higher in magnitude than the challenges outside.
Therefore, there must be mutual admiration for the challenges faced by all law enforcing
agencies, including forest personnel, and a concerted effort must be made by allconcerned without mounting any blame games or showing each other's deficiencies. The
constitution of the Anti Rhino Poaching Task Force (ARPTF) under the Additional Director
general of Police (STF) is a laudable effort in this direction. It is for the first time that fullscale coordination has started happening between the Forest and Police. It is also
welcome that the intelligence and the Special Branch of the Assam Police has started toshare intelligence inputs with the Park/ Tiger Reserve authorities. The result is that so far
this year nine poachers have been killed, many arrested, and at least five poachers
received fatal bullet injuries (and might have died elsewhere, for which there are no
confirmed reports, but only intelligence inputs). However, this is also not enough. The joint
actions of Police and Forest have only been able to touch the level 1 and 2. The levels 3
and 4 still remain untouched. Unless these levels are touched, and damage is inflicted andthe chain broken, poaching would continue to be a difficult task to control as there are
more people willing to risk their lives (in the form of new recruits in the game).
In the light of the above discussion, the following suggestions are put forth for effective
crack down on the rhino poachers and criminals involved in the illegal rhino horn trade:
1. The cooperation between the Police and Forest must continue for which apermanent institutional arrangement should be made2. The ARPTF should be strengthened with infrastructure and capacities.
3. The ARPTF personnel should be provided with high value insurance cover andincentives.
4. A system of awards should be introduced for the ARPTF personnel for carrying out
excellent anti poaching activities.
5. The process of engagement of the CBI, which handles cases only on
recommendation of the State Govt. and the process seems to be long, ineffective
and introduces delay in the system, needs to be overhauled. Such systems only
delay the start of investigations and help the criminals who get sufficient time toobliterate all evidences and act clean, making investigations long drawn and futile.
Therefore, the following is suggested in respect of CBI:
1. The CBI must be given the mandate to pick up all cases of rhino poaching
automatically and suo moto in whichever case the rhino horn could not berecovered within two days of poaching, unless there is confirmed intelligence
inputs that the horn still could not come out of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve.
2. The mandate of CBI should be shifted to markets and levels 3 and 4, rather thanconfining to level 1 and 2. The level 1 and 2 should by and large be left to local
Forest and Police personnel, unless the intelligence inputs say that the accused
are absconding to territories beyond the jurisdiction of the local forces.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 280 of 402

3. The CBI should adequately equip itself for rhino poaching and must develop an
independent manpower, infrastructure and capacities within a short period oftime. Today rhino crime is one such crime where instant exchange of moneys
are happening and the horn is being used as liquid cash of Rs. Seventy lakhs
and above.
4. The CBI should be able to attack the markets, modus operandi, money
exchanges and bring the level 3 and 4 culprits to the book.
6. The WCCB is another organization of the Govt. of India which has a key role to playin curbing rhino poaching. However, WCCB is currently not in a position to do much.
The following is suggested in respect of WCCB:
1. The WCCB must set up a full fledged (and this should be one of their biggest
establishment) office at Guwahati with branches at Dimapur, Imphal and
Itanagar.
2. The WCCB must equip itself fully with requisite infrastructure, manpower andcapacities to play the role of CBI in wildlife crime.
3. The WCCB should also run a wildlife forensics and ballistic expertiselaboratories geared to handle wildlife cases exclusively. Such facilities should beeither set up at Kaziranga or Guwahati within a time bound manner
4. The WCCB must have a team of top notch investigators who can use latest tools
to crack down on criminals. These investigators must assist the field officers in
conducting their inquiries especially in capturing finger prints and other clues toreach the criminals and assist in their prosecution.
7. The WCCB and CBI must join hands with each other in all wildlife crime
investigations.
8. These two agencies must coordinate with Interpol to reach at levels 5 criminals
across the Indian borders.
9. These agencies must also maintain close links with similar wildlife crime/ crime
investigating agencies such as in Nepal, Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, China,
Taiwan, Australia, South Africa etc.
10. All criminals outside the borders of Assam must be brought to the trial courts in
Assam that have taken up the rhino poaching cases.
11. CBI along with Army intelligence and local police must curb the illegal arms menace
which is threatening the survival of rhinos. They must somehow crack down on theillegal arms market.
12. The WCCB must also act as coordinating agency and rightly interface with CBI, theArmy, CISF, GRP, Customs and the Enforcement Directorate.
16.3.7 Protocol and Training for Enforcement Agencies
There are a variety of law enforcement agencies especially customs, CISF and GRP who
guard the border points, airports and railway stations respectively. These are all central
government agencies who get frequent transfers. The Govt of India has a norm of notkeeping personnel in the North East India for more than two years in general. In such asituation, it is important to continue sensitizing the agencies of the Govt of India aboutrhino horn trade, and the ways in which they can help the local authorities in apprehending
culprits. Therefore it is proposed that a protocol be developed for checking/ identifying/detecting rhino horn in X-ray machines and baggage scanners. All the staff should be

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 281 of 402

regularly trained using replica. Baggage scanner systems should be deployed in all theimportant railway stations of the NER.
16.3.8 Access to Mobile Subscribers' Data
The poachers have been found to use mobile phone very often to keep in contact with
their accomplices and often carry mobile phones to the scene of crime. They have beenfound to contact their support groups outside as they enter and leave the National Park.
Access to mobile subscribers' data, call records, location etc. are very vital to conduct
successful investigation and bring the poachers to book. The mobile service providers
refuse to part with the data on the pretext that forest officers are not authorized to get any
data in respect of mobile subscribers. Therefore, as a matter of policy, the forest officers
should be allowed access to all mobile data as is permissible for the other intelligence
branches of the Police.
16.4

Research and Development

The research and development component of the management of the Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve is rather weak and unsatisfactory. As there is requirement to overhaul the
research wing and develop linkages with research institutions across the world, develop
lab to land schemes for local communities and provide scientific inputs into the
management practices, the following strategies are proposed:1. A dedicated Research Fund to be created under the Authority
2. Grants to local universities and colleges (within the landscape or landscapedistricts)
3. Some of the suggested research areas could be:
1. In situ data collection and archival for habitat etc.
2. Research on GOH Rhino population dynamics, Inter-calving periods, activity andbehaviour studies
3. Genetic study of Rhino and other species
4. Interspecies interactions and space utilization
5. Climate Change and its impact on Kaziranga
6. Technologies for anti poaching
7. Proof of Concept for IT systems, databases and analysis
4. There would be an internal research team with dedicated field staff
5. There would be a research laboratory for all basic air, water, waste analysis. Thiscan be set up in PPP mode with Private, Govt or Semi Govt agencies
6. There would be a dedicated team for animal behaviour studies
7. There would be a networking and partnership with local research laboratories suchthat RFRI, NEIST, AAU, NESAC, NEHU, NERIWALM, GSI, BSI etc.
8. The gap areas of research pertaining to Kaziranga need to be identified
9. A dedicated cell on Climate Change would be set up
10. The local communities would be involved in climate change related studies
16.5

Institutional Mechanisms in Kaziranga

The details of the various institutional mechanisms, instruments and committees havebeen provided in Chapter 5. An attempt has been made to bring uniformity of goal andpurpose in the following paragraphs by proposing an overarching legislation to constitutethe Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 282 of 402

16.5.1 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority
The Government of Assam shall bring an appropriate legislation in the name and style of
The Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Act (or any other name that theGovt. may deem fit) based on the framework of the authority, its constitution, powers andfunctions etc. as suggested in Chapter 13 of this Report. The Act shall also incorporate theclauses mentioned in the following paragraphs in order to provide a holistic framework ofgovernance for effective management of the landscape. The Authority shall be immediately
constituted on promulgation of the Act with provisions of funding and powers of
expenditure as envisaged in this Report. The Authority shall be given adequate financial
and administrative freedom to carry forward its mandate within the overall framework laid
down under this Report.
16.5.2 KLCDA Policy Framework
The Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority shall work on thebasis of a set of well defined policies and programme guidelines within the overall green
growth framework described in Chapter 15. The following policy guidelines may be framed
and adopted on constitution of the Authority:1. Kaziranga Landscape Land Sale and Change of Land Use Policy
2. Kaziranga Landscape Zonation
1. Land Use Zonation
2. Building Height Regulation
3. Animal Corridor Zonation
4. Eco-Sensitive Zone Management
5. No Development Zone Management
6. Tourism Zone Management
3. Kaziranga Landscape Tourism Policy (as outlined in the Tourism section of this
Chapter)
4. Kaziranga Green Growth Policy Guidelines.
1. Climate Sustainable Agriculture.
2. Low Impact Housing
3. Renewable Energy Use
4. Unconditional Basic Income
5. Model Village Guidelines
6. Water Use and Recycle including Rain Water Harvesting
7. Waste Recycle and Management
8. Green Transportation and Roadways
5. Kaziranga Landscape Health and Education Guidelines
6. Kaziranga Landscape Livelihoods and Skill Development Guidelines
7. Kaziranga Landscape EDC and Micro-plans Guidelines
8. Kaziranga Landscape Public and Stakeholders Engagement Framework
9. Kaziranga Landscape Project Management, Evaluation and Monitoring Guidelines
10. Kaziranga Landscape Tendering and Procurement Policy
11. Kaziranga Landscape Finance, Budget, Expenditure, Accounting and Audit Policy
12. Kaziranga Landscape HR Policy
13. Kaziranga Landscape Grant of Loan, Assistance and Grants-in-Aid Policy
14. Kaziranga Landscape PPP and Green Gap Funding Policy

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 283 of 402

All the Policy and Guidelines shall be framed keeping in view the broad principles laid inthis Report and recommendations made thereof. All policy formulations shall passthorough a stakeholders consultative process, Internet based opinion and email based
expert groups, including making of small expert groups/ committees or outsourcing toexternal agencies/ professional bodies of national and international repute. Wherever
required, the clear indication of expected deliverables, outputs, outcomes, evaluation
parameters, social audit methodologies, third party audits or public hearing proceduresmust be spelt out. Each Policy and Guidelines shall be suitably versioned, and eachversion to be archived. The Policies and Guidelines.
Wherever required, the enforcement components should be clearly indicated andtransparently laid out. If required, appropriate Rules should be framed under the Act underwhich the Authority shall be constituted (say Kaziranga Landscape Conservation andDevelopment Authority Act).
There would be certain components of policy that would require implementation of Proof ofConcept (PoC), technology demonstration, pilot studies or even vendor driven PoC andtechnology demonstrations. Once the technologies are found suitable for local adoption
and well accepted or requisite changes made based on field trials, then alone suchcomponents should be undertaken for adoption in the landscape.
16.5.3 Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve Management
All areas of the Kaziranga National Park and the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve and thesurrounding Eco-Sensitive Zones and Corridors shall be managed as per the Tiger
Conservation Plan of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. Additionally, the following provisions
shall apply:1. All the funds that accrue to the Kaziranga Tiger Conservation Foundation shallcontinue to be kept and managed under the Foundation as per the requirements
and mechanism proposed under the NTCA guidelines.
2. The Foundation may seek additional funds, if required, as interest free loan from the
Authority to be returned within a period not exceeding three years.
3. All other income generated shall be part of the income of the Authority
4. The Authority shall be authorized to carry out investment/ execute works within the
Kaziranga National Park / Kaziranga Tiger Reserve within the overall ambit of thisReport and the Tiger Conservation Plan of KTR.
5. The Authority shall be authorized to implement schemes/ projects/ activities throughthe EDCs, and park its funds with the EDCs. However, the EDCs shall have to open
separate bank accounts as per requirements of the Authority.
6. The Office of the Director, Kaziranga National Park and the office of the Filed
Director, Kaziranga Tiger Reserve shall continue to function as a single unit.
7. The Office of the CEO, KLCDA shall be nucleated from the Director, KNP office andshall be developed into a full fledged establishment of which Director, KNP/ Field
Director, KTR shall become one management unit of the landscape.
16.5.4 Management of Areas outside the KTR
The areas of the Kaziranga landscape falling outside the Kaziranga National Park and or
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve shall be administered under the overall policy framework of the
Authority as follows:
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 284 of 402

1. Areas under the jurisdiction of the Eastern Assam Wildlife Division by the DFO,EAWL, Bokakhat in consultation with the SDO (Civil), Bokakhat and SDO (Civil),
Kaliabor wherever required
2. Areas under the jurisdiction of Golaghat Division by the DFO, Golaghat inconsultation with Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat wherever required
3. Areas under the jurisdiction of Jorhat Division by the DFO, Jorhat in consultation
with Deputy Commissioner, Jorhat wherever required
4. Areas under the jurisdiction of Nagaon Division by the DFO, Nagaon in consultation
with Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon, wherever required
5. Areas under the jurisdiction of Sonitpur East and West Divisions by the DFO,
Sonitpur East and West in consultation with Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur
wherever required, including corridors along the river tributaries of the Brahmaputraon the north bank touching the Kaziranga National Park/ Tiger Reserve
6. Areas under the jurisdiction of Laokhowa and Burachapori Wildlife Sanctuaries andtheir Eco-Sensitive Zones and Corridors by the DFO, Nagaon Wildlife Division in
consultation with Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon and Sonitpur wherever required
7. Areas under the jurisdiction of Orang National Park, its Eco-Sensitive Zone andCorridors by the DFO, Mangaldoi Wildlife Division, Mangaldoi in consultation with
Deputy Commissioner, Darrang wherever required.
8. Areas under the jurisdiction of Karbi Anglong East Division by the DFO, Karbi
Anglong East in consultation with the Principal Secretary, KAADC and the Deputy
Commissioner, Karbi Anglong wherever required, or any other authority constituted
in future to manage the whole/ part of the landscape falling within the jurisdiction of
the Karbi Anglong Autonomous District Council.
9. The Authority shall provide adequate infrastructure, manpower and capacity
building assistance to these offices to enable them to undertake the additional
works of the landscape. The assistance shall be proportional to the area of thelandscape being managed with due weightage on the wild animal population/
movement and human population within that portion of the landscape.
16.5.5 Tiger Conservation Plan
The Tiger Conservation Plan shall be prepared keeping consonance with this Report. The
following provisions are proposed to be applied in this regard:1. This Report shall be a part and parcel of the Tiger Conservation Plan of the
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve.
2. This Report shall be also part of the Tiger Conservation Plans/ Management Plansof Orang National Park, and the Laokhowa and Burachapori Wildlife Sanctuaries, tothe extent of the provisions of the recommendations, and the jurisdiction of the
Kaziranga Landscape Conservation and Development Authority and its policies andprogrammes.
3. In event of creation of one or more Tiger Reserve or a National Park or a Wildlife
Sanctuary in the part or whole of the watershed of the landscape as described in
Chapter 13 of this Report, falling in the Karbi Anglong District, the provisions of thethis Report shall apply to the whole of the area(s) so notified and its resultant EcoSensitive Zone. This Report shall be also part of the Tiger Conservation Plans/Management Plans of the area(s) so notified. The jurisdiction of the Kaziranga
Landscape Conservation and Development Authority shall be deemed to be overPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 285 of 402

the entire area(s) so notified and its policies and programmes shall equally apply
thereto.
16.5.6 Kaziranga Biodiversity Conservation and Development Committee
The Committee shall stand dissolved after the constitution of the Kaziranga LandscapeConservation and Development Authority.
16.5.7 Local Advisory Committee
The Local Advisory Committee for the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve has been constituted as
per the National Tiger Conservation Authority (Normative Standards for Tourism Activities
and Project Tiger) Guidelines., 2012 issued under Section 38-O of the Wildlife (Protection)
Act, 1972, Part B “Guidelines for Tourism in and around Tiger Reserves” Clause 2.1.9. The
Committee shall continue to function as envisaged under Clause 2.1.9 and 2.1.11. The
Committee shall also act as the Local Stakeholders Committee in respect of all
development activities to be carried out in the landscape. Additional members to be
included in the Committee are proposed to be:
1. Representative of PWD (NH) and Buildings
2. Representative of Power Department
3. Representative of AEDA (Assam Energy Development Agency)
4. Representative of Agriculture Department
5. Representative of PN&RD Department
6. Representative of Mission Director, NLRM
7. Representative of Health Department
8. Representative of Education Department
The Committee shall advise the Authority for all developmental works to be undertaken in
the landscape, keeping in mind the low carbon and green growth and development
strategies. The Committee shall have within its power to set up sub committees or any
expert committees.
16.6

Rhino Protocols

Successful management of a flagship species like rhino would require Standard Operating
Procedures (SOP) and established protocols which would need to be evolved and madebetter in future based on scientific inputs and learnings. However, there is a lot to be donein this regard. The management of the Kaziranga National Park/ Tiger Reserve has a great
responsibility to develop these protocols, as Kaziranga alone houses the largest
populations of rhinos in the South Asia. Nevertheless, it is to be noted that there is noumbrella program in the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India, like thenational Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), which can take the administrative
responsibility of ensuring that all such required protocols are not only developed, biut also
are followed to the core. In absence of such a mechanism, the Forest department, Govt. of
Assam has taken the lead role in setting up several committee to develop SOP andProtocols for Rhinos, noted among which are:1. SOP for Rescue of Stray Rhinos
2. Translocation of Rhino
Some additional protocols and SOPs are being suggested here with specific requirementsof Kaziranga. These are discussed below:
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 286 of 402

Rhino Horn Stockpile Protocol:
The past statistics shows that at least 35 rhinos die naturally in Kaziranga. The number
could even touch 100 or more depending upon certain circumstances such as floods. The
rhino horn is collected in almost every case of natural death, except if the horn does not
get washed away in floods accidentally. Normally, the horn is collected by the field staff,
the same is numbered sequentially in the concerned Range where its gets treated andthen weighed. From there, it is then sent to the Central Strong Room, where its weighedagain and numbered with a unique serial and then sealed and stored. A good number ofhorns, say when 5-60 in number, are together sealed in iron trunk and sent to treasury forsafe keeping.
The proposed protocol is described here:
1. The rhino horn is to be collected by the concerned Range Officer or his authorized
officer having jurisdiction over the area where the horn has been found.
2. The horn is to be brought under security to the concerned Range Office.
3. The horn shall be boiled in plain water till the nasal bone flesh gets detached fromthe horn.
4. The horn is then dipped in water or any other suitable liquid and its volume isrecorded by displacement of the liquid. Atleast three readings required.
5. The horn is air dried for two days in a room with 25 0 C temperature and low
humidity.
6. Weight of the horn is recorded in an electronic balance which is calibrated.
7. Density of the horn is calculated
8. The Range Horn Serial No is put on it along with a barcode generated by the Range
Office. It is pasted on the horn which includes weight of the horn and its volume
9. The horn is transported under security to the Central Strong Room.
10. At the Central Strong Room, the horn is physically examined for
1. Physical condition of the horn
2. Whether broken?
3. Any cut marks?
4. Any other physical mark on the horn?
11. The horn is photographed against a white matt finish non reflecting backgroundfrom six directions, by keeping the horn as if the rhino were to face you, namely
00,900,1800,2700, Top and Bottom
12. Outline of the base of the horn is recorded, and the dimensions of the bounding
rectangle are noted.
13. The height of the horn from the base to the tip is recorded by keeping the horn
vertically up against a scale.
14. Denture plaster cast of the base is made.
15. A new barcode is generated with the Govt. of India Serial No and othercharacteristics measured as above. The barcode is labeled on all the photographs(physical print/ digital print), the plaster cast, the base diagram with bounding
rectangles.
16. A microchip is inserted little above the base of the horn.
17. The base underneath is drilled as per RhODIS Protocol and sent for DNA Indexing
to a certified lab.
18. The horn is labeled with the new barcode
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 287 of 402

19. Data entry made of all the calculations, records, photographs, plaster casts
20. The horn taken to the physical safe area and stored there
21. On collection of sufficient numbers, the horns shall be recorded out “OUT” transit,
entered into the system, sealed in a box, a transit challan shall be generated fromthe system.
22. The box shall be removed after sealing. The keys of the lock to be sealed and kept
in the safe with a serial number.
23. All these operations shall be under mounted CCTV
24. The box shall be deposited under security cover to the treasury.
25. The storage room shall be physically and electronically secured with a Tier IV Data
Centre like construction (for fire etc.) and security parameters and a fire proof vault
room door.
26. Crime exhibits shall not be deposited in the treasury.
27. Quarterly returns of the horn stock along with IN-OUT balance to e submitted to the
Govt.
16.7

Tourism

Tourism in Kaziranga Tiger Reserve should be a responsible, informed and sustainable
travel to the conservation area, where minimum or no damage is caused due to any kindof pollution (noise pollution, air pollution or water pollution), or waste generation (plastic
bottles, polythene bags, biscuits/ chips packets, edible items), or carbon emissions. The
following strategies are proposed for tourism, which shall be developed into a full fledged
Kaziranga Tiger Reserve Tourism Plan based on the following considerations:Ticketing and Booking:Staring from the tourist season of 2014-15, effort shall be made to:
1. Provide online booking of Elephant Seats
2. Minimum elephant seats to be declared range wise at the beginning of the season
3. Additional minimum elephant seats may be declared at least 3 days prior to theactual date of safari.
4. Balance seats, if any, to be booked on the spot, previous evening
5. A fixed quota in the elephant seats may be kept for State guests/ dignitaries/
Departmental visitors
6. 65% of the jeep safari quota to be booked online
7. 10% departmental quota may be reserved
8. Online Payment gateway to be provided
9. Payment through Card (Credit/ Debit etc.) to be enabled at the counters
10. All visitors to fill up mandatory form with photograph
Entry and Exit:
All entries of visitors to the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve to be recorded by dedicated 24X7
CCTV cameras, ANPR systems. The entry and exit time of each vehicle to be recorded at
the gate electronically. The following checks shall be applied at the entry point:
1. To check if driver/ visitors are in inebriated condition
2. Driver/ visitors in inebriated condition not to be allowed
3. Identity check4. In time recording
5. Out time recording
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 288 of 402

6. Check for any plastic bottles/ eatables
7. Warning for not littering the Park
8. Check for Arms and Ammunition using DFMD/ HHMD/ frisking / X-Ray
9. Entry/ Exit regulation systems to be placed for comfort of visitors
10. Emissions from vehicles shall be checked and recorded.
11. Depending upon maturity of the system, each visitor (above 10 years of age) may
be given an Identity card valid for a day/week/month/ season depending upon therequirement
Public Conveniences:
The following public conveniences may be provided at the entry/ exit/ intermediate halt
points:
1. Parking of private vehicles
2. Parking fee to be charged
3. Gents/ ladies/ Children toilets
4. Dust bins for waste disposal
5. First Aid
6. Mobile Charging Points
Jeep Safari Regulation:
The following steps for regulation of jeep safari within the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve areproposed:
1. The registration of vehicles to be continued.
2. All vehicles must be of uniform color and make (except any Electric Vehicle that
may be introduced by the KTR management)
3. All vehicles must bear Assam Govt registration number only
4. The Driver must have valid driving license and Identity Proof
5. Each vehicle must have valid pollution and emission certificate from APCB
6. The vehicle must be roadworthy
7. Each vehicle shall be fitted with a Vehicle Tracking System
Carrying Capacity:
Based on the carrying capacity to be worked out separately in the Tourism Plan, thefollowing restrictions shall apply:
1. Not more than 216 vehicles per day (all ranges put together) shall be allowed.
2. During peak season additional vehicles upto 300 may be allowed to cope with the
rush. However, a Congestion fee of Rs. 100.00 per vehicle may be charged during
peak season when number exceeds 216.
3. Minimum distance between two vehicles shall be 100-150 meters
4. Equal number of vehicles should be directed in each range (subject that one group,
if not very big, gets accommodated in one rage, with a maximum of 4-5 vehicles)
5. Big groups may be split in two or more ranges
6. Jeep safari entry timings shall be 7.30 AM to 10.30 Am and 1.30 PM to 3.30 PM.
7. Early/ late entries may be allowed for accommodating rush
Entry Fee and Other Fees:
It is felt that certain entry fee and rates must be revised for entry into Kaziranga. This
would not only keep the rush under control, but also generate more revenues for the Tiger
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 289 of 402

Reserve. It is also observed that the Indian rates are very low and the rates for foreigners
are very high. There is a strong reason to rationalize this as well. The following revised
levies and taxes are proposed:
1. Entry fee for Indian visitor Rs. 250.00 and for foreigner Rs. 500.00 per entry
2. Road tax to be at Rs. 300 per vehicle per entry
3. Elephant fee and professional fee kept as it is
4. Non professional camera charges may be levied as below for Indian as well as
foreigner visitor:
1. Still Camera for all
Rs. 200.00
2. Movie camera for all
Rs. 800.00
3. Video Camera for all Rs. 800.00
5. Additional Green Fee to be introduced per person Rs. 25.00 for all
6. Additional Green Fee to be introduced per vehicle Rs. 100.00 for all
Green Fee and Its Regulation:
Green Fee is proposed to be introduced for raising resources for implementation of low
carbon strategies for the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve. The following proposal is made in thisregard:1. Till such a time that there are no zero emission vehicles, all visitors shall be
required to pay Green Fee.
2. Supposing a EV Safari is introduced, then the following measure may be adopted:
1. The Operator of the EV Safari shall charge the same rates as other vehicles
from passengers
2. The savings on the Fuel shall be the extra earning incentive for the operators
3. There shall be no Green Fee on EV Safari. Therefore, the visitors would benefit.
4. The EV Safari shall be booked 100% online, except vacancies if any may belocally filled.
3. The EV Safari may be run in PPP mode.
4. Attempt shall be to phase out all fossil fuel based safari vehicles over a period of 10
years.
5. Provision/ Infrastructure for charging of EV shall be made at Entry/Exit points and at
halting points on the tourist circuit. Charging points shall also be maintained along
the NH37. These shall be on payment basis. All charging stations shall be zero
emission based systems operating on Solar/ Wind/ Mechanical power
Hotels and Lodges:
As per the National Tiger Conservation Authority (Normative Standards for Tourism
Activities and Project Tiger) Guidelines., 2012 issued under Section 38-O of the Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972, Part B “Guidelines for Tourism in and around Tiger Reserves”
Clause 2.1.6, a Conservation Fee is required to be levied on all tourism facilities, except
home stays upto 6 bed facilities. The Conservation Fee may range between Rs. 500 to Rs.
3000 per room per month. The facilities need to be classified in various categories startingfrom home stay to high end. In view of the above guidelines, the following action plan is
proposed:
1. All tourist infrastructure to be registered with the Field Director, Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve with the following terms and conditions:1. Registration under Sarai Act
2. Land Ownership documents
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 290 of 402

3. Land use change NOC from Agriculture to Commercial by the Filed Director
prior to start of business / registration under the Sarai Act
4. Details of beds/ rooms along with associated facilities
5. Star category/ Heritage category awarded by the Govt. of India, Ministry of
Tourism, if any
6. Total Power consumption (peak/ normal/ lean season), rated power, captive
power, Renewable Sources of Energy
7. Waste Disposal and Recycle infrastructure
8. Water source and associated infrastructure
9. Rain Water harvesting infrastructure
10. Black Water/ Gray water treatment/ recycle
11. Sewerage system/ disposal of waste
12. Scale map of the property with GPS based longitude and latitude of the cornersof the property
2. All such infrastructure / registered properties shall be classified on two parametersnamely Carbon Emission and Guest Comfort
3. The Guest Comfort classification and charges proposed are:
1. Home Stay normal: No Charges upto 6 beds. Beyond 6 beds must move tocategory 2 below
2. Home Stay certified (upto 12 beds): Rs. 25 per bed per day
3. Lodge (Only stay): Rs. 50 per bed per day
4. Dining Only Dhaba/ Restaurant: Rs. 1.00 per Rs. 100.00 transaction. Cashdispenser to be installed
5. Hotel (Stay plus dining): Rs. 100 per bed per day
6. Luxury Hotel: Rs. 250 per bed per day
7. The above rates shall be based on occupancy only
8. Each registered property shall have to install CCTV in its public/ common
premises/ corridors
4. The Carbon Emission classification shall apply for categories 3 to 6 mentioned
above in the following manner:
1. The Carbon classification shall be based on the principle that least carbon
emission property shall get the highest rating and least of the Green Levies tobe imposed on the property.
2. Platinum shall be the highest category, and the owner shall pay Rs. 50 per bed
per day during tourist season, and Rs. 25.00 per bed per day during off season.
In addition, the owner shall pay Rs. 2000 per month flat for inspection and othercharges
3. Gold shall be the second highest category, and the owner shall pay Rs. 75 per
bed per day during tourist season, and Rs. 38.00 per bed per day during off
season. In addition, the owner shall pay Rs. 2500 per month flat for inspection
and other charges.
4. Silver shall be the third highest category, and the owner shall pay Rs. 100 per
bed per day during tourist season, and Rs. 50.00 per bed per day during off
season. In addition, the owner shall pay Rs. 3000 per month flat for inspection
and other charges
5. Bronze be the second lowest category, and the owner shall pay Rs. 150 per bed
per day during tourist season, and Rs. 75.00 per bed per day during off season.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 291 of 402

In addition, the owner shall pay Rs. 4000 per month flat for inspection and othercharges
6. Lead shall be the lowest category, and the owner shall pay Rs. 250 per bed per
day during tourist season, and Rs. 125.00 per bed per day during off season. In
addition, the owner shall pay Rs. 5000 per month flat for inspection and othercharges
7. The per bed charges shall be on occupancy basis.
8. The properties can invest in green infrastructure and move up the ladder aftergetting a new certification at any point of time
9. All the parameters of classifications and marking system shall be made online
and available in public domain, and should be such that each property can do its
own assessment itself
5. However, every registered property including home stay shall have to maintain/
provide the minimum green facilities such as solar/ wind power, LED lighting, waste
disposal system, rain water harvesting.
16.8

Training, Capacity Building and Manpower Support

There would be additional requirement of trained manpower from various other domains
such as computers, IT, electronics, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, project
managers, system analysts and other domain experts. It is proposed to hire professionals
on contract at levels from L0 to L4, L1 being the lowest in hierarchy and L4 being thehighest. From project management, capacity building, training, change management pointof view, the levels would be somewhat as below:
1. L4
2. L3
3. L2
4. L1
5. L0

Principal Consultant (capable of independently heading a project)
Senior Consultant (can assist PS, and lead domain specific teams)
Consultant (domain expert with at least 3-5 years field experience)
Junior Programmers/ technicians/ diploma holders
Skilled manpower/ data entry operators

The salaries of the above personnel could be driven by market and incentive and output
based, rather than fixed or flat. However, depending upon the level and experience, thesalaries could fluctuate from as low as Rs. 5000 per month to Rs. 1.50 per month.
16.9

Raising of Additional AFPF Battalions

As the rhino population from Kaziranga would have to be translocated to other protectedareas of Assam, security and strong protection measures would become vital in deciding
the future course of action. Currently, there are hardly any spare capacities in the existing
two battalions, as Kaziranga has been holding onto the AFPF without tightly. As a result
other PAs and forest areas are suffering due to lack of adequate manpower to guard theresources and forest property. The situation is likely to worsen in course of time, as therhinos start spreading out. The habitats outside Kaziranga would also become very
important in about five years time from now. If adequate protection measures are nottaken, all the rhinos would become target of the bullets of poachers, thereby advancing theclock on rhino. If the rhinos have to be protected with zeal outside Kaziranga, process ofraising four more AFPF battalions should be started. The third battalion is already in thepipeline with HQ at Samaguri. That leaves us with three more battalions to be planned andraised in the next three years so that we have adequate trained an dwell armed manpower
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 292 of 402

ready to defend the territory of the rhinoceros elsewhere in Assam. It is suggested that of
the three battalions that need to be planned, one should be planned between Sibsagar
and Tinsukia, as Dibru Saikhowa and Pani Dihing are potential rhino habitat expansion
candidates. Similarly, another battalion should be planned in lower Assam so that Manascan be fully secured. Once the Kaziranga landscape is secured, rhinos would start staying
near the north bank areas on a more permanent basis, and chances of their straying
further north would increase. Further, the corridors of Kaziranga landscape that would also
fall on the north bank along most of the river systems joining the Brahmaputra from thenorth that would be recognized as corridors, would need constant protection, as the
population densities are very high there. In view of this one battalion should be planned on
the north bank side, say near Biswanath.
16.10 Assam Rhino Range Expansion Project (ARREP)As already stated in Chapter 6, the excess rhinos from Kaziranga need to be translocatedto new secure sites annually. The removals that can safely happen from Kaziranga isestimated to be 25-35 rhinos per year. It has been seen that there have been some goodexperiments in the African countries for expanding range and securing the future of theblack rhino. A similar initiative is required in Assam as well.
Current Status of Rhinos in Assam:
The current status of rhinos in Asam PA wise is given below:
Sl.
No.

Name of PA

Year of Census

Rhino Population

1

Kaziranga National Park

2013

2329

2

Rajiv Gandhi Orang National Park

2012

100

3

Pobitora Wildlife Sanctuary

2012

93

4

Manas Tiger Reserve

2014

31

TOTAL

16.10.1

2553

Black Rhino Expansion Project

The Black Rhino Range Expansion Project started in South Africa in 2003 to create new
populations of black rhino. Prior to 1960, the estimated population of black rhinos was
65000 across Africa. However due to poaching, only 2000 rhinos were left by the end of
1990s. After introduction of the BRREP, eight new black rhino populations have beencreated in South Africa, residing in KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo spread over a territory of
about 1600 sq km. So far about 130 black rhino have been translocated. More than 40
calves have been born on the new project sites. Of course poaching continues to bemenace. So far 3 rhinos have been poached from these secure sites.
16.10.2

IRV 2020

The Indian Rhino Vision (IRV) 2020 is a joint program of the Assam Forest Department,
World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and International Rhino Foundation (IRF) formulatedby the “Task Force for Translocation of Rhinos within Assam” in November 2005. The
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 293 of 402

IRV2020 is a multi-partner program where government departments are working together
with the international organizations, local NGO’s and the communities. The program has
been formulated by the “Task Force for Translocation of Rhinos within Assam” constitutedby the Government of Assam vide notification No. FRW.24 / 2005 / 15 dated 30 th June,
2005 incorporating conservationists and officials from the government as well as nongovernmental sector. The aim was to work for the long-term conservation of the rhinos inthe state through enhanced protection, habitat management and range expansion and thevision set was “To have a rhino population of 3000 in the wild in Assam in spread overseven of its protected area by the year 2020”. The plan was to secure the existing rhino
population in Kaziranga NP, Pobitora WLS and Rajib Gandhi Orang National Park and to
re-introduce rhino’s in the potential habitat’s identified viz. Manas NP, Dibru Saikhowa
WLS, Laokhowa - Bura Chapori WLS with a viable population of rhino through wild to wildtranslocations from Kaziranga NP and Pobitora WLS.
To assess the feasibility, specialized teams for Security and Habitats were formed and fieldstudies undertaken in the identified potential areas. From the reports received, the Task
Force decided to select Manas NP as the first site to re-introduce the rhinos afternecessary corrective measures were undertaken. These pro-active efforts for theconservation of the rhinos in Assam received acceptance globally and necessary support
both financial and technical were made available by International Organizations andDonors as well as the Government of Assam and the Bodoland Territorial Council for the
implementation of the program. The security group of the Task Force made multiple
assessments and presented the findings to the Task Force. On learning about thesatisfactory progress of works, a decision was taken to move four rhinos to Manas startingin 2008 after obtaining necessary permissions from the Government of India. Plans weremade to translocate twenty rhinos to Manas as the founder population from Pobitora WLS
and Kaziranga NP. After all necessary preparations, as a part of the training phase, twomale rhinos were released in Manas NP on 12 th April 2008 transported by truck from
Pobitora escorted by a special team. The rhinos were radio collared and were monitored
on a daily basis to understand their ranging and social behavior. The reports indicated thatthe rhinos had adapted well and the habitat was quite favorable. Thereafter, 16 morerhinos were translocated to Manas in batches, two rhinos were released in December
2010, four in January 2011, two in January 2012, four in February 2012 and four more in
March 2012. Till date eighteen rhinos have been released in Manas in batches. All thesehave been wild to wild translocations under IRV2020. The translocated rhinos weremonitored regularly using radio telemetry as well as by standard traditional methods.
The ranging of rhinos were regularly monitored by dedicated teams for the first time in the
wildlife history of Assam. It also generated a lot of documentation regarding the postrelease behavior and ranging of the rhinos. The data generated by the field teams were
fed into a GIS platform with the support of the WWF team and mapped for better
understanding and arriving at management decisions. Manas also housed five rhinos
which were under rehabilitation and thus, there were now thirty-one rhinos in the Park.
Eleven calves were recorded to have been born in Manas after the translocation and threeof these from the rehabilitated females, which is a reliable indicator that the rhinos haveadapted and settled well in Manas.
However since late 2011, three years after the first two rhinos were translocated to the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 294 of 402

Park, the first incident of poaching took place. Since then till date, a total of seven rhinos
have been poached in Manas raising serious questions about the security situation. A lot ofefforts have been initiated during the last one year that included implementation of Law
Enforcement Monitoring (SMART) to improve the security situation and after re-assessing
the situation the translocation of the two remaining rhinos of the first planned batch oftwenty rhinos have been put on hold by the Rhino Task Force. It has been decided to reassess the situation from time to time in terms of the prevailing security situation forplanning any further translocations to the park under IRV2020.
After the success of translocation trials in Manas, the Task Force identified the LaokhowaBurachapori complex in Nagaon district of Assam to re-introduce rhinos in the area.
Rhinos existed in these wildlife sanctuaries till recent pass which were wiped out due tosocial unrest in that area. The habitat team has already given the green signal for therhinos and the security team has given the suggestions to improve the security scenario tosupport the rhinos. Works are in progress and necessary funds are being provided from
WWF, IRF, USFWS and Government sources. The Government of India has alreadyprovided the permission for the translocation of ten rhinos as the first batch and it isexpected that the first round of translocation to the complex from Kaziranga NP can be
conducted by early 2015.

RANGING PATTERN OF THE RELEASED RHINOSMANAS NATIONAL PARK, ASSAM[%

Doimari[%Mathanguri

( ( (
(
($
(
Gabharukhunda[%(% $$ (($
$$
( %%%
%
$
(% Kanchanbari[ #%$Kokilabari(((($$ $$$$
$
$
($
%
%
(#(#
($$ $
%
U
(''
$($$
%
%%
%
($
%
($
($
$
$
(%
%$%
$
[$
#
$$ $$$
(%
(%$
($$
##
$
$$
$
%
$$$$
$$
U
#']#
$
($$$
$$
#
%
$
#
%%
%
$$
(
%
U
#
# #
$
$$
$$
#
$
#
%$
$$ $
'%
$
$$
Charpoli U
%
# #
$($$
$$ $
%
%
(%
$
%%
%
$
$
%
%
$
%
%
U
U
#
(
%
(
$
$
$
$
$
%
%
%
%
U
'
%
#
%
#
[ Betbari(%#%#$$ $$$$$(%
'(%
'%
''x
%
%
%
'x
$
(U
%
U
'#%
%
[$
%
U
U
$$
%# $
($($
$
%
%
#
%
((%
'$
#
%
%
U
%
''$
(#$
%
%
(%
$
%
%
%
%
U
%
#
''
U
$
%
%
'U
#
U
#
# % %
#
(#
$
$
%
(
$
']#
%
$
$
$
U
%
'
$
'U
(%
(
%
%
$
$
$
(
(
%
#
(
#
((
$
'##
%
%
(
'
(
((
%
(
%
'
%
%
'
$
%((%
$$
%
(#%
(( %
'(($
%
%
(((#
'%
'
#
#%
'%
#
# (# $%'# %(%
'$
(#
%
'
$
$
%
#
U
%
(
%
%
U
$
$
(
%
%
%
U
U
%
#
%
'
%
#
(
$
'
% %
U
' U
(%
%
'] ($$(($
$
%
U
$
%U$
#$
# '#$
#
%
U
%
( $$
'U
%
'$
( $$
U
% '$
%
(U
U
'#x# U
#
#x $
']%
%
( ((
#
%
#']$
$$$
%
'U
x 'U
']$
(#%
x
#( U
']
'%
U
'### (# $
$
%
(U
x
$
%%
'%
$
']%
U
x
U
#
BHUYAPARA
$
#(
']
%
#']
#']
U
$
''x##'x
#'$
#
']%
U
' U
%
$
'x(#xx
%#( U
%
%
$
$$
(# U
'U
''(#$
$
%
'x
$
((#%
#
%
]((
U
''x
U
U
%
#'U
U
$
#
%
%
'((#U
#
(%
U
#
(%
# ']
']%
']##
%
# '# ' $
$
%
U
'##
x
(#'U
%
#'U
#U
']']']#% %
#$
($
#$
#'$
%
%
$
#
x
(%$
%
U
%
U
x
'U
xU
U
#
(%
#$
%
x
%
'##$
''U
%
% %
(U
U
[x
('#
'](%
('((#$
%'U
#
U
#'#
'#($
'(U
']#']%
%$
%
U
%
xU
'#
(' $
(U
']#x ']##']x%$U#(']# Narayanguri
']%
#
#
(
#
#
%
#
#
U
$
$
%
%
%
#
(
'
'
'
x
']%
U
U
(
(
#
#
x
$
$
(
#
(
Bhatgali
]
'
%
%
'
($
x#
%U x
(U
x%
[ xU
'] ']#']# ']']# x']# #']']#']%
x# BASBARI#x ']# x#'] #x ']x xx##'] x xxxxxx
x# xxxx
x
xx
x
xx
Rhino2
']
']

%
a

N
W

E
S

%
a

KEYS

PANBARI

%
a

#

']

#
#

0

']

10 Kilometers

Rhino10Rhino3

Rhino11Rhino4

Rhino12Rhino5Rhino13Rhino6

Rhino14

Rhino7

Rhino15

Rhino8Rhino16

Rhino9Rhino17
Rhino18

Data: IRV 2020 (April2012 - March2013)

The key learnings from the programme are:1. Security of the habitat is of utmost priority, as even a single rhino lost in a new
struggling population would mean that the population would continue to bethreatened even in the long run.
2. Non availability of the drugs necessary for chemical immobilization within India is a
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 295 of 402

serious limitation to the programme of translocation. The procurement process isvery difficult and time consuming as clearances / licenses / NOC’s are necessary forthe import from various Government departments / agencies. The drugs is classified
as Narcotics and is governed by the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Rules, 1985.
3. There is no dedicated team working on IRV2020. Nor is there any overarchingenabling mechanism other than the task force.
4. The fund flow is highly irregular, and a program like IRV2020 cannot be sustainedwith erratic fund flows.
16.10.3

Aim of the ProjectAs can be seen that there is lot to learn from the IRV2020. The Assam Rhino Range
Expansion Project must be institutionally very strong, as rhinos matter for the people ofAssam, and a dedicated team is required to be put in place along with an enabling overarching mechanism.
Therefore, the Assam Rhino Range Expansion Project shall be a Mission Mode Project.
The aims of the project would be:

1. To reintroduce rhinos back to its traditional habitats in Assam
2. To extend the rhino habitat so that an ecological carrying capacity of 6000 rhino
population can be sustained
3. To initiate habitat improvement programmes in all the rhino bearing areas as well as
potential rhino bearing areas
4. To secure all rhino bearing habitats
5. To foster international cooperation and research on the Greater One Horned Rhino
16.10.4

Status of IRV2020 in ARREP

IRV2020 is proposed to become a sub programme under the ARREP. All the funding
available for IRV2020 shall be available for achieving the future targets, as the key aim of
the both the schemes is the same- i.e. long term survival of the rhinoceros. In fact, thefund gap in IRV2020 would be met from AREEP; and the scheme would provide foradequate manpower support to IRV2020.
16.10.5

Institutional Mechanism of ARREP

Since ARREP would be a mission mode proramme, and habitat extension is the focus
area, the following proposals in this regard are made:1. There would be an Apex Committee headed by the Chief Secretary, Assamcomprising of the following members:
1. Chief Secretary, Chairman
2. Addl CS, Revenue, Member
3. Addl CS, Finance, Member
4. Principal Secretary, Forest & Env. Member
5. Principal Secretary, P&D, Member
6. PCCF & HoFF, Member
7. PCCF (Wildlife), Member secretary
8. Addl PCCF (Biodiversity), Member
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 296 of 402

9. CCF/CF of concerned wildlife areas/ PAN, Members
10. Deputy Commissioners of concerned districts, Members
11. Representatives of NGOs, Members
2. The existing IRV2020 Task Force may double for the Executive Council of the
ARREP
3. The ARREP shall be housed in the office of the PCCF(WL) with a dedicated PMU
headed by a L4 resource and two L3, 4 nos of L2 and 6 nos of L1 resource. About
10 nos of L0 resource could also be hired for continuous field work and data
gathering
4. There shall be a separate account for the ARREP to receive funds from the KLCDA
16.10.6

Plans and Activities

The ARREP can adopt the plan and activities of IRV2020. The additional areas to becovered would include:
1. Assessment of carrying capacity of existing rhino bearing areas
2. Scout possible extensions areas, and design strategies for their security
3. Plan research and development for the GOH rhino
4. Engage with the communities in the vicinity of the rhino bearing areas for EDC andeco-development intervention
5. Continuously assess the security situation around the existing rhino bearing areas
and organize funding for the gap areas.
6. Carry out capacity building and training of the field staff and provide schemes fortheir motivation.
16.10.7

Areas to be covered

The following PA would be covered first:
1. Manas Tiger Reserve
2. Burachapori WLS
3. Laokhowa WLS
4. Dibru Saikhowa Biosphere Reserve
5. Pani Dihing WLS
6. Orang National Park
7. Pabitora WLS
8. Buffer areas of the Tiger Reserves
16.10.8

The ECC of the Habitats and Challenges in Rhino Bearing Areas

The target set forth should be to create an Ecological carrying capacity of 5000 rhino
populations in Assam. This seems to be a good target, as it is not likely to be reached
before 2070, assuming that we reach a population size of 3000 by 2020. This gives us agood time to identify the habitats, clear them of any encroachments, and secure them.
However, there are several challenges. These have been discussed PA wise below:-

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 297 of 402

Manas Tiger Reserve:
The Manas National Park has an area of 500 sq km, and the Manas Tiger Reserve has anotified core area of 840 sq km including the barnadi WLS. Of these, only limited area issuitable for rhino. Manas alone may not support more than 100 rhinos. However, the buffer
area of Manas constitutes of areas such as the Manas RF (on the west of the Sukhanjan
river) having a total area of 619.03 sq km. Of this, the western part is almost all forest
villages and encroachments. Next to the Manas RF lies an area of about 350 sq km, forwhich already a proposal has been moved to convert it into a National Park. This part of
the Manas RF is a very vast expanse of grasslands with a few woodlands scattered here
and there. This is an excellent habitat for rhino, and probably can grow to be the next
Kaziranga, if given protection. This habitat to my mind could be the next dream habitat of
the rhino. The undersigned had surveyed most of this area during 1998-99 for working
plans, as Working Plan Officer, Upper Assam Circle, Jorhat. One of the first targets should
be to notify the area as national Park and secure it just like Kaziranga. This could be thehome for about 800 rhinos in the future.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 298 of 402

Bura Chapori Laokhuwa WLS:
The twin sanctuaries are currently part of the Kaziranga Tiger Reserve, and a brief
description about them can be found in the Part I Chapter 3. it must be mentioned herethat in 1983 during the period of Assam agitation, 35 rhinos (the last of the surviving
species in these parts) were poached over a period of three days. [the undersigned
tried to unearth the recorded proof of the above, but was not successful, as the records,
being old appears to be out of life]. Now the area is bereft of any rhino. The area appears
to have an ECC of 200 rhinos as of now. Though the Burachapori is getting ready toreceive its first rhinos from Kaziranga sometime in 2015, what is more important from the
ARREP point of view is to work from now for a secure and extended habitat. Right fromunder the Kaliabhomora bridge to Singri hills, there is land along the Brahmputra rivermeasuring 248 sq km which can be acquired in two parts of 140 sq km and 108 sq km.
The DFO Nagaon Wildlife Division has already initiated correspondence in this regard with
the Deputy Commissioner, Sonitpur. There could be human populations residing in thechar areas, which needs to be taken into account. Incidentally, there is also a Kuchmara
RF having an area of 21.55 sq km, adjacent to Burachapori on the west. This RF wasconstituted in 1978. During the Assam agitation in the eighties, the area got encroached.
Part of this RF is eroded, and a fishery mahal is currently operating there. There are about1200 families settled in this RF. About 14 sq km of the RF is encroached. We may have toinitiate eviction drive to clear the RF, and use it as extended habitat for the rhino. The newareas would enable the ECC of this twin sanctuaries to be raised to 450. This entire area
has been proposed under the Kaziranga Landscape.
Orang National Park:
Orang National Park is an excellent rhino habitat , but only confined to 79 sq km. The park
currently houses about 100 rhinos. The ECC could be about 150 as of now, since Orang is
an excellent productive habitat. There is a potential to include more areas starting from thewest of the proposed additions to Burachapori-Laokhowa WLS, right upto the western partof the Park. This could potentially provide an additional area of 140 sq km, which issubstantial. The ECC of the Park could then possibly go upto 300. The DFO Mangaldoi
Wildlife division should move a proposal of addition forthwith to the concerned Deputy
Commissioner. Orang along with the extended area has been proposed to be in the
Kaziranga Landscape. The rhino census figures for Rajiv Gandhi Orang National Park are
given below for record:-

PIL 66/2012

Sl No.

Year

Count

1

2006

68

2

2009

64

3

2012

100

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 299 of 402

Pobitora WLS:
The Pobitora wildlife sanctuary is currently the smallest rhino bearing area in Assam with avery high density of animal population. It has notified area of about 39 sq km and there areabout 90 rhinos as of now. Pobitora seems to be at its peak of the Ecological Carrying
Capacity. However, it is to be noted that there is an area of 1100 ha (11 sq km) which still
is not in possession of the sanctuary, and local people are continuing to raise agricultural
crops in that parcel of land. Therefore, the effective area of Pobitora is only 28 sq km andthe rhino density is actually higher than officially thought. The Assam Survey, it appears,
recently conducted a survey of the land, and it is expected that this parcel may be handed
over to the sanctuary in near future, much to the relief of the rhino. There are also private
areas where rhinos stray regularly. If possible, the chances of buying about additional 5-10
sq km of land should be explored.
Sl No.

Year

Count

1

1987

54

2

1993

56

3

1995

68

4

1999

74

5

2004

79

6

2006

81

7

2009

84

8

2012

93

Dibru Saikhowa NP:
The Dibru-Saikhowa National Park has an area of 340 sq km, and is surrounded by ten
mighty rivers on all the sides. Currently there are no rhinos. The area, however is suitable
for the rhinos, and as such is already on the radar of the IRV2020. However, due toimmense biotic interference of human and cattle population, the Park may not be in aposition to support more than 35 rhinos. There are two villages namely Laika and Dadhia
were two forest villages set up in 1955. There were 1553 families in 2005. The population
has grown up now and considerable encroachments also have occurred. There are morethan 10000 cattle population. It appears that villagers are also now interested to move out,
but there does not seem to be any appropriate place available. If the population is moved
out, and the area allowed to rejuvenate, it would be in a position to support about 150
rhinos. Therefore, this area also needs a long term planning and administrativeinterference to find another good home for the Rhinos.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 300 of 402

Panidihing WLS:
The Panidihing WLS is about 34 sq km area. This earlier was supposed to be a rhino
bearing area. The site is ecologically highly disturbed and surrounded by villages allaround. It has been carved out of the original Panidhing RF, of which only 21.39 sq km isleft. There is also a forest village, and most of the RF area remains encroached. There areabout 1500 families residing inside the RF. Unless a strategy is adopted to bring thevillages out side, security of the rhinos would be questionable. Considerable attention
needs to be paid to this area in order to reintroduce rhinos here.
Kaziranga National Park:
As of now about 490 sq km is the actual habitat of the rhino, of which about 84 sq km isalready lost to the river Brahmaputra. Therefore, the effective area is about 406 sq km. On
acquiring all the proposed additions, and additional forest areas in the adjoining hills, thetotal area of Kaziranga would be about 948 sq km. Beyond this, considerable effort would
be required to increase the area any further. If we take the entire area of the Karbi Anglong
and adjoining watersheds, and protect it fully, there would be a gain of 750 sq km ofadditional area for Kaziranga. However, effective use of this area would largely depend
upon, besides excellent protection strategies, the treatment that we give to the NH37 andthe way we restore and retrofit the corridors.
The fate of the rhinos in Assam would largely depend upon whether, we, the people ofAssam, rise to the occasion and do every bit that we can do to restore and secure thehome range of the rhinos.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 301 of 402

CHAPTER 17
17 Time Budget
The overall time perspective for implementation of the proposals has been kept at 10
years starting from the 3rd Quarter of 2014-15 to the 4th Quarter of 2024-25. Further, theproposals put forth from Chapter 11 to 16 have been classified as Short Term (ST),
Medium Term (MT), Long Term (LT), and some intermediate time frames. The short term
would mean a maximum period of one and half years. The short term measures should becomplete by the end of 2015-16. Medium Term initiatives are expected to be completed by
the end of the fifth year i.e. 2019-20. The Long Term initiatives would expected to be overby 2024-25. However, some initiatives may not exactly fit into the classification given
above, especially habitat related activities which need to be carried out annually. These
have been termed Annual Ongoing (AO). There are certain measures which need to be
implemented in next 6 months. These have been termed as Immediate (IM)In terms of Time of Start, some activities would start right away in 2014-15, others would
take time of project preparation of about a year and half. These proposals would haveproject preparation phase slotted in the short term, while the project actually may start in
medium term. In certain other cases, if the short term phase ends, the roll out may start in
the medium phase. Certain issues are matter of policy implementation, which is required to
be done either in short term, medium term or long term. Therefore, the timelines havebeen coded as below:
Code

Full Form

Time Period

IM

Immediate

From 1st September, 2014 to 31st
March, 2015

IS

Immediate to Short Term (TimeSpill Over)

From 1st September, 2014 to 31st
March, 2016ST

Short Term

From 1st September, 2014 to 31st
March, 2016SM

Short Term to Medium Term

From 1st April, 2015 to 31st March,
2020

SL

Short term to Long Term

From 1st April, 2015 to 31st March,
2025

MT

Medium Term

From 1st April, 2016 to 31st March,
2020

ML

Medium Term to Long Term

From 1st April, 2016 to 31st March,
2025

LT

Long Term

From 1st April, 2020 to 31st March,2025

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 302 of 402

17.1

Immediate Measures

Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

11 Habitat Strategies
11.3

1

Taking over 2nd to 6th Additions to KNP

IM

11.4

1

Detailed Corridor Survey and Mapping

IM

11.5

6

EvictionsIM

12. Upscaling Anti Poaching Infrastructure
12.2.1

1

SMART GUARD Pilot

12.2.2

3

SMART Communication Pilot

IMIM

12.2.3

5

Electronic EyeIM

8Pilot Perimeter Security in Burapahar Range

IM

13 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority
1

Enactment of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation& Development Authority

IM

2

Formation of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation &Development Authority

IM

14 Management Strategies
14.1.114.2.114.2.214.2.51

Fill current vacancies

IM

2

Replace old and infirm staff

IM

3Fill vacancies in AFPF

IM

4

Local Community VolunteersIM

8Additional Responsibilities to R HQ and Beats (1-6,8)

IM

10 Additional Incentives (1-4, 6,7, 9,10)

IM

14 Equipping floating camps and boats with equipment

IM

16 Dog SquadIM

16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
16.3.1

3

Removal of Legal Bottlenecks

IM

16.3.2

4

Removal of Procedural Bottlenecks (1-16)

IM

16.3.36

Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation Methodology (1-18,
20, 23-27)

IM

8

Dog Squad Protocol

IM

9

Postmortem Protocol

IM

10 Post Gun Shot Protocol

IM

11 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation (1-4,7)IM

16.3.4
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 303 of 402

16.5.5

19 Tiger Conservation Plan (1)IM

16.5.6

21 Kaziranga Biodiversity Conservation and Development
Committee

IM17.1.1 Immediate to Short Term
Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

11 Habitat Strategies
2

Habitat Extension Programmes (HEP)- Forest LandIS

12. Upscaling Anti Poaching Infrastructure
12.3

16 Solar PowerIS

16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
16.2

2

16.5.722 Local Advisory Committee

Applying provisions of the Sarai Act, 1867

IS

16.7

24 Tourism

IS

17.2

Short Term Measures

Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

IS

Proposal

Time
Frame

1

Experimental Bank Line Erosion Control Measures atDebeswari bank line

ST

2

Revised FREMAA proposal for Kaziranga – Its
formulation and approval

ST

4

Brahmaputra Bankline Migration study for Kaziranga

ST

5

Creating Habitat Management Infrastructure- ATV/
Tractors/ Excavaors/ Dumpers

STST

11 Habitat Strategies
11.1.3

3

HEP – Procurement of Government Land11.4.2

5

Other Corridors Survey and Delineation

ST

11.7

9

Informed Management

ST

12. Upscaling Anti Poaching Infrastructure

12.2.7
PIL 66/2012

2

SMART GUARD Roll Out

4

SMART Communication Roll Out

10 UAV
Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

ST
ST
ST
Page No. 304 of 402

11 Quad Copters/ Aerostat
12.2.8ST

12 Vehicle Mounted Surveillance

ST

13 AWS-WQ MonitoringST

14 GIS

ST

15 IT

ST

13 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority
3

Office, Manpower and Funds

ST

14 Management Strategies
5

Raise the Sanctioned Strength of EAWL Division

14.1.2

6

Reorganization of EAWL Division

ST

14.2

7

Realignment of Anti Poaching Camps

ST

9

Additional Responsibilities to R HQ and Beats (7,9)

11 Additional Incentives (5, 8-10)

ST

ST
ST

14.2.312 Family Welfare measures

ST

14.4

18 Veterinary HospitalST

19 Hospital at Kohora

ST

20 Central Strong RoomST

21 Kaziranga Mini Data CenterST

22 Model Range Offices

ST

24 Upgradation of KCCC

ST

27 PilkhanaST

29 Upgradation of CWRC

ST

30 Upgradation of 2nd AFPF HQST

31 VC System

ST

32 Satellite Based MonitoringST

15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
15.7.2

4

Organic certification

ST

15.8.811 Rain Water HarvestingST

16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
16.1

1

State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972

ST

5

Removal of Procedural Bottlenecks (17-21)

ST

12 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation (5)ST

16.3.6

15 Inter Agency Coordination

ST

16.3.716 Protocol and Training for Enforcement Agencies

ST

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 305 of 402

16.5.4

18 Management of Landscape Areas outside KTR

ST

16.6

23 Rhino Horn Stockpile Protocol

ST

16.8

25 Training and Capacity Building PolicyST

17.2.1 Short Term to Medium Term Measures
Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

12. Upscaling Anti Poaching Infrastructure
12.2.4

6

R&D in Anti Poaching & SurveillanceSM

12.2.6

7

Perimeter Security

SM

9Ground Surveillance Radars

SM

17 Tazer and Other Equipment

SM

12.4

13 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority
4

Policy Formulations

SM

14 Management Strategies
15 Permanent watch towers in the River Brahmaputra
14.3

SM

17 Roads and Bridges

SM

25 IMAX Theatre & 3D Films

SM

28 Staff Quarters

SM

15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
15.9.213 Safe Walkways

SM

15.9.314 Safe CyclingSM

15.9.6

16 Electric Bus

SM

15.9.7

17 Electric Vehicle

SM

15.10

20 Peoples FrameworkSM

15.10.1

21 Building Green and Resilient Communities

SM

15.10.4

23 Microplans and Capacity BuildingSM

16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
7

Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation Methodology (19,21,22)

13 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation (6)16.3.5
16.9

PIL 66/2012SMSM

14 Implementing RhoDISSM

20 Tiger Conservation Plan (2-3)

SM

26 Raising of Additional AFPF Battalions

SM

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 306 of 402

17.2.2 Short Term to Long Term Measures
Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

11 Habitat Strategies
5

HEP – Procurement of Tea Garden Land

SL6

HEP – Procurement of Private LandSL

14 Management Strategies
33 Extension of Management Practices

SL

15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
15.6

1

Renewable Energy

SL

15.7.1

3

Organic Agriculture

SL

15.8

5

Low Impact Buildings

SL

15.8.2 / 3

6

Building Certification

SL

15.8.4

7

Net Zero BuildingSL

15.8.5

8

Off-the-grid Buildings

SL

15.8.69Model Villages

SL

16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
16.4

17 Research & Development

SL

16.8

25 Assam Rhino Range Expansion Project

SL

17.3

Medium Term Measures

Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

11 Habitat Strategies
3

Revised FREMAA proposal for Kaziranga – Its
implementation

MT

2

Policy for ban of use of chemical pesticides andinsecticides

MT

6

Forestry Logging Equipment

MT

8

Setting up of mechanical workshop

MT

2

NH37 Overpasses on Corridors

MT

13 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 307 of 402

5Functioning of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation& Development Authority

MT

14 Management Strategies
23 Central Interpretation Centre

MT

26 Staff Grooming cum Recreation Centre

MT

15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
15.8.912 Waste ManagementMT

17.3.1 Medium Term to Long Term Measures
Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

11 Habitat Strategies

11.6

7

Securing the entire bankline on the south bank4

HEP – Procurement of Community Land

ML
ML

8

New Corridors

ML

15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
15.7

2

15.8.7

10 Grey Water

Climate Smart AgricultureML

15.9.5

15 Electric TruckML

15.9.818 Transit Oriented Development

ML

15.9.919 Better Roads

ML

17.4

Long Term Measures

Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

ML

Proposal

Time
Frame

11 Habitat Strategies6
11.2

PIL 66/2012

Dredging and Chapori Reclamation within 500 of
BanklineLT

1

To create No Activity Zone of 500 m

LT

7Fire Fighting Equipment

LT

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 308 of 402

17.5

All Measures at a Glance

Sl.
No

ID
Broad
Category ofIntervention

Proposal

Time
Frame

1

Experimental Bank Line Erosion Control Measures atDebeswari bank line

ST

2

Revised FREMAA proposal for Kaziranga – Its
formulation and approval

ST

3

Revised FREMAA proposal for Kaziranga – Its
implementation

MT

4

Brahmaputra Bankline Migration study for Kaziranga

ST

5

Brahmaputra river profiling and acoustic survey

AO

6

Dredging and Chapori Reclamation within 500 of
BanklineLT

7

Securing the entire bankline on the south bankML1

To create No Activity Zone of 500 m

LT

2

Policy for ban of use of chemical pesticides andinsecticides

MT

3

Invasive Weed Control Programme (Annual Areas ofOperation)

AO

4

Other Habitat Improvement Programmes (OHIP)

AO

5

Creating Habitat Management Infrastructure- ATV/
Tractors/ Excavaors/ Dumpers

ST

6

Forestry Logging Equipment

MT

7

Fire Fighting Equipment

LT

8

Setting up of mechanical workshop

MT

1

Taking over 2nd to 6th Additions to KNP

IM

2Habitat Extension Programmes (HEP)- Forest LandIS3

HEP – Procurement of Government Land

ST

4

HEP – Procurement of Community Land

ML

5

HEP – Procurement of Tea Garden Land

SL6

HEP – Procurement of Private LandSL

11 Habitat Strategies
11.1.3

11.2

11.3

11.4

PIL 66/2012

1

Detailed Corridor Survey and MappingIM

2

NH37 Overpasses on Corridors

MT

3

NH37 as Highland for animals

ML

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 309 of 402

4Corridor RetrofittingML

11.4.2

5

Other Corridors Survey and Delineation

ST

11.5

6

EvictionsIM

7

Compensation to People

IS

11.6

8

New Corridors

ML

11.7

9

Informed Management

ST

12. Upscaling Anti Poaching Infrastructure
12.2.112.2.2

1

SMART GUARD Pilot

IM

2

SMART GUARD Roll Out

ST

3

SMART Communication Pilot

IM

4

SMART Communication Roll Out

ST

12.2.3

5

Electronic EyeIM

12.2.4

6

R&D in Anti Poaching & SurveillanceSM

12.2.6

7

Perimeter Security

SM

8

Pilot Perimeter Security in Burapahar Range

IM

9Ground Surveillance RadarsSM

12.2.712.2.810 UAVST

11 Quad Copters/ Aerostat

ST

12 Vehicle Mounted Surveillance

ST

13 AWS-WQ MonitoringST

14 GIS

ST

15 IT

ST

12.3

16 Solar Power

IS

12.4

17 Tazer and Other Equipment

SM

13 Kaziranga Landscape Conservation & Development Authority
1

Enactment of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation& Development Authority

IM

2

Formation of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation &Development Authority

IM

3

Office, Manpower and Funds

ST

4

Policy Formulations

SM

5

Functioning of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation& Development Authority

MT

14 Management Strategies
14.1.1

PIL 66/2012

1

Fill current vacancies

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

IM

Page No. 310 of 402

2

Replace old and infirm staff

IM

3Fill vacancies in AFPF

IM

4

Local Community Volunteers

IM

5

Raise the Sanctioned Strength of EAWL DivisionST

14.1.2

6

Reorganization of EAWL Division

ST

14.2

7

Realignment of Anti Poaching Camps

ST

14.2.18

Additional Responsibilities to R HQ and Beats (1-6,8)IM

9Additional Responsibilities to R HQ and Beats (7,9)

ST

14.2.210 Additional Incentives (1-4, 6,7, 9,10)IM

11 Additional Incentives (5, 8-10)

ST

12 Staff Training and Capacity Building

AO

13 Floods and Disaster Management

AO

14.2.312 Family Welfare measures

ST

14.2.413 Brahmaputra River mapping after floods along withitems of work 2 to 5

AO

14 Equipping floating camps and boats with equipment

IM

15 Permanent watch towers in the River BrahmaputraSM

14.2.516 Dog Squad

IM

14.3

17 Roads and Bridges

SM

14.4

18 Veterinary HospitalST

19 Hospital at Kohora

ST

20 Central Strong RoomST

PIL 66/2012

21 Kaziranga Mini Data CenterST

22 Model Range Offices

ST

23 Central Interpretation Centre

MT

24 Upgradation of KCCC

ST

25 IMAX Theatre & 3D Films

SM

26 Staff Grooming cum Recreation Centre

MT

27 PilkhanaST

28 Staff Quarters

SM

29 Upgradation of CWRC

ST

30 Upgradation of 2nd AFPF HQST

31 VC System

ST

32 Satellite Based MonitoringST

33 Extension of Management Practices

SL

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 311 of 402

15 Kaziranga Landscape Green Growth Framework
15.6

1

Renewable Energy

SL

15.7

2

Climate Smart AgricultureML

15.7.1

3

Organic AgricultureSL

15.7.2

4

Organic certification

ST

15.8

5

Low Impact Buildings

SL

15.8.2 / 3

6

Building Certification

SL

15.8.4

7

Net Zero BuildingSL

15.8.5

8

Off-the-grid Buildings

SL

15.8.69Model Villages

15.8.7

10 Grey Water

15.8.811 Rain Water HarvestingST

15.8.912 Waste ManagementMT

15.9.213 Safe Walkways

SM

15.9.314 Safe CyclingSM

15.9.5

15 Electric TruckML

15.9.6

16 Electric Bus

SM

15.9.7

17 Electric Vehicle

SM

15.9.818 Transit Oriented Development

ML

15.9.919 Better Roads

ML

SL
ML

15.10

20 Peoples FrameworkSM

15.10.1

21 Building Green and Resilient Communities

SM

15.10.2

22 Man Animal Interface Management

AO

15.10.4

23 Microplans and Capacity BuildingSM

16 Policy, Law, Protocols and Programme Strategies
16.1

1

State Amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972

16.2

2

Applying provisions of the Sarai Act, 1867

IS

16.3.1

3

Removal of Legal Bottlenecks

IM

16.3.2
16.3.3

PIL 66/2012

ST

4

Removal of Procedural Bottlenecks (1-16)

IM

5

Removal of Procedural Bottlenecks (17-21)

ST

6

Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation Methodology (1-18,
20, 23-27)

IM

7

Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation Methodology (19,21,22)SM8

Dog Squad Protocol

IM

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 312 of 402

916.3.4

Postmortem Protocol

IM

10 Post Gun Shot Protocol

IM

11 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation (1-4,7)

IM

12 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation (5)ST

13 Modernizing Wildlife Crime Scene Investigation (6)SM

16.3.514 Implementing RhoDIS

SM

16.3.6

15 Inter Agency Coordination

ST

16.3.716 Protocol and Training for Enforcement Agencies

ST

16.4

17 Research & Development

SL

16.5.418 Management of Landscape Areas outside KTR

ST

16.5.519 Tiger Conservation Plan (1)IM

20 Tiger Conservation Plan (2-3)

SM

16.5.6

21 Kaziranga Biodiversity Conservation and Development
Committee

IM

16.5.722 Local Advisory Committee

IS

16.6

23 Rhino Horn Stockpile Protocol

ST

16.7

24 Tourism

IS

16.8

25 Training and Capacity Building Policy

ST

16.9

26 Raising of Additional AFPF Battalions

SM

16.8

25 Assam Rhino Range Expansion ProjectSL

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 313 of 402

CHAPTER 18
18 Budget and FinanceAn attempt has been made based on the suggested measures listed in the previous
Chapter, to arrive at budgetary cost estimates of the various items of work. These costs at
many places are tentative and a Detailed Project Report (DPR) would have to be preparedfor most of the strategies suggested. For example a DPR has already been prepared andsubmitted to ONGC for the SMART GUARD Pilot. Another DPR for SMART
Communication is underway for submission to Oil India Ltd. Both the proposals are meant
for CSR funding from the corporate houses. This Chapter also outlines briefly the sourcesof fund that may be tapped for implementation of the programmes and strategies.
Additionally, an indication of possible revenue sources for the KTCF and the Authority
have been also indicated.
18.1

Budget Estimates

All the figures in Crore Rupees and costed for a period of 10 (ten) years:
Sl
Programmes andCore
GoI/ GoA
Non PlanState Plan
No
Strategies
Project
Project
SupportSupportFunding
Funding

Total

1

Erosion Control

20.00

2,270.00

2

Habitat Improvement
Programme

70.00

5.00

75.00

3

Habitat Extension
Programme

200.0050.00

250.004NH37 & Corridors

250.002250.00

2000.00

4A Gohpur-Numaligarh 4
Lane Bridge andConnectivity

2750.00

4B Kaliabor to Gohpur 4
Lane with anotherbridge on the river near
Kaliabhomora

4388.45

2,250.00

5

Informed Management
System15.00

6Anti Poaching
Equipment

280.0015.00

295.0015.00

7Anti Poaching
Infrastructure &Maintenance365.0030.00

395.008

Capacity Building of
Staff

30.00

5.00

35.00

9

Reorganization

150.00150.0010 Staff and Family
Welfare140.0015.00

155.0011

170.0010.00

180.00Key Support

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 314 of 402

Infrastructure
12 Kaziranga LandscapeConservation &Development Authority

80.00

25.00

13 Green Growth
Strategies

1500.00

10.00

14 Support to Local
Communities for
Resilience

350.0080.00

15 Research &Development

50.00

16 Technical & Project
Manpower Support

35.00

17 Assam Rhino Range
Expansion Programme

250.0018 Policy Implementation

90.00

19 Third Party Audit

10.00

Total

3,905.00

Programme
Implementation

4,100.25

115.001,510.00
0.50

430.50

5.00

55.00
35.00

50.00
10.00

300.00100.0010.00

11,478.45

185.00195.50195.25Grand Total

18.2

10.00

8,625.50
195.25

11,478.45

185.00195.508,820.75

Funding Sources

The cost estimates have four different types of funding sources, namely:
1. Core Project Fund (CPF)
2. Govt. of India or Govt. of Assam Project Funding
3. Non Plan support from the Govt. of Assam
4. State Plan support including Project Tiger Funding
18.2.1 Core Project Fund (CPF)
This is the core of the programme and strategies, which are designed to be fundedthrough a Core Project Fund. The cost of the protection measures for the rhino, welfare of
the Staff, infrastructure development, local communities development etc. has been all
bundled together in the Core project Fund. In case the the Govt. of India or the Govt. of
Assam do not provide funds wholly or partly, the entire amount or part thereof (anybalance left after receipt of any grant of the Govt. of India or the Govt. of Assam), is meant
to be met entirely from the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) fund of the Central Govt.
PSUs. The Core Project Fund required for a period of 10 years is about Rs. 4100.00 crore,
which translates to Rs. 410.00 crore per year. If 15-20 PSUs come forward in the publiccause to fund about Rs. 20-25 crore per year, the entire CPF can be met easily without
any difficulties. The Govt. of India may request the PSUs to come forward and partner with
Kaziranga in the cause of protection of the rhino in a long term CSR partnership. Some ofthe suggested PSUs are:

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 315 of 402

1. ONGC
7. NTPC

2. Oil India Ltd.
8. PGCIL

3. NRL Ltd. 4. IOC Ltd. 5. GAIL Ltd. 6. HP Ltd.
9. NHPC
10. Coal India 11.SAIL
12. BHEL

For the UIB Corpus Fund (UCF), an amount of Rs. 200.00 crore has already been built
into the CPF. Additional fund for the corpus would be raised through private sector CSR
and donations. The target is to raise the UCF money to more than Rs. 500.00 crore.
18.2.2 Project Funding
This funds have been targeted from already ongoing programmes of the Govt. of India or
the Govt. of Assam. The key projects in this regard are listed below:
1. FREMAA for Erosion Control (Rs. 137 Crore)
2. Water Resources Department's schemes for Bank Erosion control (Rs. 2250.00 cr)
3. NHAI for the fly overs on the NH37 between Jakhlabandha and Bokakhat (Rs.
2000.00 cr)
4. NHAI for Gohpur Numaligarh 4 lane Bride and road connectivity (Rs. 2750.00 cr)
5. NHAI for rest of the 4 Lane from Kaliabor to Gohpur (Rs. 4388.45 cr)
6. Contributions from organic farming promotion projects (Rs. 10.00 cr)
7. NRLM support for communities
8. NRHM support for communities
9. National Skill Development Council support for skills development
10. Employment Generation Mission of the Govt. of Assam[Sl. 7 to 10, put together Rs. 80.00 crores]
18.2.3 Non Plan Support
The non plan support is for salary and other allowances, office expenses etc. for the
additional sanctioned strength of staff at the Eastern Assam Wildlife Division as well as the
Field Director and the office of the CEO of the Kaziranga Landscape Conservation andDevelopment Authority. The total additional non plan support envisaged from the Govt. of
Assam comes to Rs. 18.50 crore per year.
18.2.4 State Plan Support
The State Plan support is mostly as per the APO approved by the Govt. of India under the
Project Tiger scheme. This has been brought on record mainly to ensure that there no
duplicity in expenditure, and the funds are well spent. However, certain additional fund has
also been sought for which annually, the Department has to make budget provision. These
are in the spirit of contribution of the Govt. as matching grants for the CSR fundings
required for the CPF. This would also keep the focus of the Govt on the projects all thetime. The additional funding sought annually is as below:
Sl. No.

Programmes and Strategies

1.

Habitat Extension programme (HEP)

5.00

2.

Anti Poaching Equipment

1.50

3.

Anti Poaching Infrastructure and Maintenance(50% additional assistance sought)

1.50

4.

Capacity Building of Staff

0.50

PIL 66/2012

Amount (in Cores Rupees)

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 316 of 402

5.

Key support Infrastructure

6.

KazirangalandscapeDevelopment Authority

1.00

7.

Research and Development

8.

Assam Rhino Range Expansion Programme

5.00

TOTAL

16.00

Conservation

and

1.00
0.50

Therefore, additional requirement of the State Plan fund is Rs. 16.00 crores perannum.
18.3

Revenues and Income

This Report has also proposals for raising certain entry fee for visitors in the Park/ Tiger
Reserve. Additionally, new levies such as Conservation Fee, Congestion Fee, Green Levy
etc. have also been brought. These are in consonance with the guidelines issued by the
NTCA for tourism management.
The conservation fee alone would bring additional revenues to the tune of Rs. One crore
or more to the Kaziranga Tiger Conservation Foundation. Similarly, the green levies would
bestow about Rs. 50.00 annually to the Authority. The rise in the entry fee would lead toan additional income of about Rs. 1.50 crore in the next tourist season for the Foundation.
30% of all the income would be spent on the Eco Development Committees.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 317 of 402

Bibliography and References
1. Abbas AR, Liang RY, Frankhouser A, Cardina S, Cubick KL, Green Noise
Wall Construction and Evaluation, US Department of Transportation, 2011
2. Amin Rajan, Bramer Max & Emslie Richard, Intelligent Data Analysis forConservation: Experiments with Rhino Horn Fingerprint Identiication,
Applications and Innovations in Intelligent Systems X, 2003, pp 207-222
3. Assam Govt, 2014, White Paper on Wildlife Conservation in Assam, 1 stJune, 2014
4. Balfour Lady Eve, The Living Soil, Faber & Faber, 1948
5. Boden T.A et al, A Synthesis of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Fossil Fuel
Combustion, Biogeosciences, 9, p1845-1871, 2012
6. Brandon Peter s, Lombardi Patrizia, Evaluating Sustainable Developmentin the Built Environment, Blackwell Science, 2005
7. Byrne Richard W, Moss Cynthia, Bates Lucy A, Elephant Cognition inPrimate Perspective, Competitive Cognition and Behaviour Reviews, Vol4, p65-79, 2009
8. Cato Molly Scott, Green Economics: An Introduction to Theory, Policy andPractice, Earth Scan, 2009
9. CE Delft & DLR, 2013, Zero Emission Trucks: An Overview of State of the
Art Technologies and Their Potential
10.
Chen Feng, Liu Yisheng, Hua Goonei, LTLGB 2012, Proceedings ofthe International Conference on Low carbon Transportation and Logistics,
and Green Buildings, Volume I, Springer-Verlag 201311.
CITES, Assessment of Rhino Horn as a Traditional Medicine, April,2012
12.
Cooper, I. & Curwell, S, The implications of urban sustainability,
Building Research and Information, 26(1), p17-28, 1998
13.
Costanza Robert et al, The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services
and Natural Capital. Nature, Vol 387, 15 May, 253 -260, 1997
14.
Costanza, R, Cumberland J, Daly HE, Goodland R, Norgaard R, An
Introduction to Ecological Economics, eBook, September 18, 2008
15. Dabany, Jean Rovys. 2013. Reuters, February 6.
www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/06/us-gabon-elephantsidUSBRE9150HG20130206
16.
Daly Herman E, Beyond Growth, Beacon Press, Boston
Massachusetts, USA, 1996
17.
Daniel J.C. & van Oden Ann C., Structure and Composition of
Rhinoceros Horn, Biomolecular Materials, 1992
18.
Danish Govt, 2013, The Danish Climate policy Plan: Towards a
Lower Carbon Society, August, 2013
19.
Davis Todd, Hale Monica, Public Transportation's Contribution to US
Green House Gas Reductions, APTA, USA, September, 2007
20. Elephant Advocacy League. 2013. The ivory curse
http://elephantleague.org/the-ivory-curse/
21.
Emslie Richard, Bilogical management of Rhinos: An African
Perspective, Kaziranga Centenary Celebrations, 2005

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 318 of 402

22.
Emslie Richard, Two of World's Great Conservation Success Stories:
Hiuhluwe-Umfolozi and Kaziranga, Kaziranga Centenary Celebrations,2005 (updated in the International Conclave on Kaziranga, 20 th May,
2014, Guwahati)
23.
Fukuoka Masanobu, The One Straw Revolution, An Introduction to
Natural Farming, Rodale Press, 197824.
Garawd R, Understanding the population dynamics of Great Indian
One-Horned Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) of Kaziranga National
Park, Assam, India, M. Sc. Dissertation, 2009
25.
Georgescu-Roegen Nicholas, The Entropy Law and the Economic
Process, Harvard University Press, 1971
26.
Ghosh Sonali, Kumar Chandra, Paradise Lost and Regained: Lessons
Learnt from the national Parks of India, Solutions for a Sustainable andDesirable future, Vol3, Issue 4, p50-84, August, 201227.
Goswami Deba Jyoti, Use of Chemical Fertilizers and Pesticides in
the Small Tea Gardens of Assam and its Efect on Environment: A Case of
Golaghat, International Journal for Basic Sciences and Social Sciences,2(2), 2013, p135-138
28.
Guilford Gwynn, Why Does a Rhino Horn Cost $300,00?, May 15,
2013 (Internet)
29.
Hieronyous T.L. et al, Structure of white Rhinoceros (Ceratherium
simum) Horn Investigated by X-Ray Computed Tomography and Histology
with Implications for Growth and External Form, Journal of Morphology,
267:1172-1176, 2006
30.
Holmgren David, Permaculture Principles and pathways beyond
Sustainability, Permanent Publications, 2011.
31.
INTERPOL, Environmental crime programme, Wildlife Crime Scene
Investigation: Guide to Evidence Collection and Management, July, 2013
32.
IPCC, 4th AR, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis,
Cambridge University Press, 2007
33.
IPCC, 5th AR, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis,
Cambridge University Press, 2013
34.
IUCN, AsRSG Report, 1997
35.
Joshi, N. M, Labour Conditions in Assam, Assam: Economy, Society
and Culture, Vol V, Discovery of North East India: Geography, History,
Culture, Religion, Politics, Sociology, Science, Education and economy (in11 Vols), Ed Sharma S.K, Sharma Usha, Mittal Publications, 2005
36.
King Lucy E, Soltis J, Douglas-Hamilton I, Volvath F, Savage A,
African Elephants Alarm Calls Distinguish between Threats from Humans
and Bees, PLOS ONE, Vol 9, Issue. 2, e89403, February, 2014
37.
Li Xianguo, Editor, Green Energy: Basic Concepts andFundamentals, Springer-Verlag, 201138.
Lovelock James, GAIA, A New look at Life on Earth, Oxford
University Press, 1979
39.
Mahanta Chandan, Nath A, Borah D, Goswami R, Phukan A, Riverbank Erosion and Restoration in the Brahmaputra River in India, The
Clarion, Vol 1 No1, p1-7, 201240.
Maczulak Anne, Renewable Energy: Sources and Methods, Infobase
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 319 of 402

Publishing, 2010
41.
Mars Ross, The Basics of Permaculture Design, Permanent
Publications, 2003
42.
Martin Esmond, Talukdar B.K, vigne Lucy, Rhino Poaching in Assam:
Challenges and Opportunities, Pachyderm, No. 46, July-December, 2009,p25-3443.
Mathur VB, Stolton Sue, Hockings M, Varma A, James R,
Opportunities and Challenges for Kaziranga National Park, Assam overthe next ifty years, UNF-UNSECO, Enhancing Our Heritage Project Team
44.
Medhi G.K. et al, Growth and Nutritional Status of School AgeChildren (6-14 Years) of Tea Garden Worker of Assam, Indian Journal of
Medical Science, Vol.60. No.12. pp.496-505, 2006
45. Mili Gopal, Gam Gitanjali P, Inclusive Development- A Study among the
Tea Garden Workers of Nagaon District, http://academia.edu, 201346.
Mollison Bill, Permaculture A Designers' 2 nd Edition, Manual, Tagari
Publications, 2002
47.
MoUD, Govt. of India, JNNURM, Primer 03: Revision of Byelaws to
make Rainwater Harvesting mandatory (Optional Reform under JNNURM)
48.
NDMA, 2012, Final Report on Study of Brahmaputra River Erosion
and its Control, 2012.
49. Naharnet. 2013. www.naharnet.com/stories/en/81060
50.
Nielson Craig, Wolfe Conie Baker, Conine Dave, Green Building
Guide, Design Techniques, Construction Practices & Materials for
Afordable Housing, RCAC California, 2009
51. Parry, Wynne. 2011. Mob wipes out elephants, tigers, and rhinos. Live
Science,July, 2011 www.livescience.com/15263-organized-crimeendangered-species-wildlife.html
52.
Peter's Atlas of the World, Oxford Cartographers, UK, 1989
53.
Quintero Juan D, Roca Roberto, Morgan Alexis, Mathur Aradhna, Shi
Xiaoxin, Smart Green Infrastructure in Tiger Range Countries: A Multi
Level Approach, Discussion Paper, the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the World Bank, Global Tiger Initiative,
September, 2010
54.
Ramchandra TV, Shwetmala, Emissions from India's Transport
Sector: State-wise Synthesis, Atmospheric Environment, XXX (2009), p1-8
55.
Rees Williams E, Wackernagel Mathis, Our Ecological Footprint:
Reducing Human Impact on the Earth (New Catalyst Bioregional Series),
New Society Publishers, 1996
56.
Robert, Karl-Hendrick, The Natural Step Story: Seeding a Quiet
Revolution, New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, USA, 2002
57.
Roy PS, Lahon P, Baruah P, Azeem A, Kushwaha SPS, land areachange and rhino habitat suitability analysis in Kaziranga National Park
Assam, Tigerpaper, Vol XXVII, No2, Apr-Jun, 2000
58. Saina, Carl. 2013. Op-Ed Contributor—Blood Ivory.
www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/opinion/global/blood-ivory.html?_r=0
59.
Saikia Biswajit, Development Tea garden Community and Adivasi
Identity Politics in Assam, Dialogue, Volume 10, No. 3, January-March,
2009
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 320 of 402

60. Schipper, Lee, Celine Marie-Lilliu, and Roger Gorham, Flexing the Link
between Transport and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Path for the WorldBank,
Washington,
DC:
World
Bank,
http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2000/lex2000.pdf, June, 2000
61.
Schipper Lee, Maria Cordeiro, Wei-Shiuen NG, Measuring theCarbon Dioxide Impacts of Urban Transport Projects in Developing
Countries, World Resource Institute, 2007
62.
Sharma JN, Acharjee S, A GIS based study on Bank Erosion by theRiver Brahmaputra and Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India, Earth
Systems Dynamics Discussions, p1085-1106, 2012
63.
Singh S.N, Narain A Kr, Kumar P, Socio-Economic and Political
Problems of Tea Garden Workers, Mittal Publications, New Delhi 2006
64.
Sipes James, Sipes M.L., Creating Green Roadways: Integrating
Cultural, Natural and Visual Resources into Transportation, Island Press,
2013
65.
Trebuil Guy, Companion Modelling for Resilient and Adaptive Social
Agro-Ecological Systems in Asia, CIRAD, Integrated Systems for
Sustainability, 2008
66. UNEP, 2011, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable
Development & Poverty Eradication, http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy
67.
UNEP RISOE Center, Denmark, Promoting Low Carbon Transport inIndia: Factsheet, 2013.
68.
UNFCCC, Climate Change: Impacts, Vulnerabilities and Adoption in
Developing Countries, 2007
69.
Union of Concerned Scientists, Annual Report 2011, USA
70.
US Department of Transportation, 2010, Project JPA 04-088, ArizonaState Route 260: Preacher Kenyon Wildlife Fence and Crosswalk
Enhancement Project Evaluation, 2010.
71.
Wackernagel M et al, National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts
2005: The underlying calculation method, Global Footprint Network,
Oakland, CA, USA, 2005
72.
Wiedmann, T. and Minx, J., A Deinition of 'Carbon Footprint'. In: C.
C. Pertsova, Ecological Economics Research Trends: Chapter 1, pp. 1-11,
Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge NY, USA, 200873.
Woolley Tom, Low Impact Building: Housing Using Renewable
Materials, Wiley-Blackwill, 201374.
Yadav Rachna, Barua Anamika, A Study on (Un)sustainable City
from Entropy Perspective- A case from India, ISEE Conference andRio+20: Challenges and Contributions for a Green Economy, 16-19 June,
2012, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
75. http://basicincome2013.eu
76. www.cites.org/eng/news/world/19/7.php
77. http://dudhwatigerreserve.com/rhinoceros.html
78. http://http://ghconline.gov.in/
79. http://www.greentribunal.gov.in
80. www.ifaw.org/united-state/resourse-centre/criminal-nature-globalsecurity-implication-illegal-wildlife-trade
81. http://kaziranga.assam.gov.in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 321 of 402

82. http://www.motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-rise-of-anti-poaching-techheat-seeking-planes-drones-and-dna-mapping
83. www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/issues_for_debate/de-horning
84. www.savetherhinos.org/rhino_info/poaching_statistics
85. www.saverhinohorn.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/shoot_to_kill
86. http://stardate.org/nightsky/moon
87. http://wessa.org.za

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 322 of 402

Bibliography on Kaziranga Till 2009
A Microsite Analysis of Resource Use Around Kaziranga National Park, India. The Journalof Environment & Development, Vol. 16, No. 2, 207-226 (2007)
A.K. Dutta (1991) Unicornis-the great Indian One-horned rhinoceros. Konark Publications.
N. Delhi.
Ahmed, I (1992). Large mammals migration in Kaziranga National Park (elephants, rhino
and wild buffalo): A report for Diploma in Wildlife management, WII.
Ahmed, S. (1988) Status of the Wild buffalo in Kaziranga National Park. A report for
Diploma in Wildlife management, WII.
Ali, S., Daniel, J.C. and Rahmani, A.R. (1985). Study of ecology of certain endangered
species of wildlife and their habitats. The floricans. Annual Report 1, 1984-1985. Bombay
Natural History Society, Bombay. Pp. 79-84.
Alstrom, P., Jirle, E., Jaderblad, M., Kjellon, N., Larsson, G., Paulsrud, A., Saellstrom, J.,
Smitterberg, P., & Alind, P. 1994. Birds and mammals observed in Assam in February,
1994.
Anon (1908). Imperial gazetteer of India, Provincial series. Burma. I. Superintendent ofGovernment Printing Calcutta.
Anon (1997) Landmass dynamics and Rhino habitat suitability analysis in Kaziranga
National Park,Assam. Project Report. IIRS Dehradun and ARSAC, Guwahati.
Anon (1999) Erosion at Kaziranga National Park, Assam: a study based on multi-temporalsatellite data. Project Report from Sac-Ahmedabad and Brahmaputra Board, Guwahati.
Anon (1999) Report on the regional meeting for India and Nepal of the IUCN / SSC Asian
Rhino Specialist group.
Anon. (1978). Kaziranga Wildlife Sanctuary. Hornbill 8: 17-26. Unseen.
Anon. (1988). Kaziranga under water. Himal 1(2): 33.
Arun Srivatava (1999) Primate studies in North East India- II- U.S. Primate Project.
Report.
Aziz, T. 2008 Indian rhino vision 2020: pp. 11-12 In: Syangden, B. et al. Report on theregional meeting for India and Nepal IUCN/SSC Asian Rhino Species Group (AsRSG);
March 5-7, 2007 Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India. Kaziranga, AsRSG: pp. i-ii, 1-28
B.S. Bonal. Action Plan for Kaziranga National Park, Bokakhat- 758612. Assam. ASSAM
Bailey, J. 1983, .Deo hanh: Assam's endangered duck..The Sentinel 12. June, Guwahati.
Bannerjee, S.R. (1993) Report on requirement of Arma, Ammunition and WirelessEquipment at Kaziranga National Park. WWF-India.
Bannerji, G. (2001) Habitat use by the Great India One-horned rhino (Rhinoceros
unicornis) and other sympatric species in Kaziranga National Park, Assam India. Msc.
Dissertation. Wildlife institute Of India
Barua, M. Sharma, P. (1999) Birds of Kaziranga National Park, India. Forktail 15:47-60.
Baruah, P. and Goswami, D.C. (?) Satellite study of vegetation cover & wetlands of

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 323 of 402

Kaziranga National Park (Assam). ARSAC
Baruah, P.P.(1994). Study of tropic Dynamics of Kaziranga National Park with particularreference to the sustainability of the producer
Baura, M. Talukdar, B.K. 2008 Status and rhino poaching in Assam and trade on rhino
horn: p. 14 In: Syangden, B. et al. Report on the regional meeting for India and Nepal
IUCN/SSC Asian Rhino Species Group (AsRSG); March 5-7, 2007 Kaziranga National
Park, Assam, India. Kaziranga, AsRSG: pp. i-ii, 1-28
Bhattacharjee, P.C. (?)Avifaunal Study in Kaziranga National Park. Guwahati University.
BirdLife International. 2001. Threatened birds of Asia. BirdLife International, Cambridge,
U.K.
Biswas, T., Mathur, V.B, Sawarkar, V.B. (2002) Status and Distribution of Hog Deer (Axis
porcinus) in India. WII report.
Bonal,B.S. and Oberoi. 2004. Kaziranga National Park. New Delhi.
Bora, U. 2008 Status of rhino and horn stockpiles in Kaziranga National Park: p. 7 In:
Syangden, B. et al. Report on the regional meeting for India and Nepal IUCN/SSC Asian
Rhino Species Group (AsRSG); March 5-7, 2007 Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India.
Kaziranga, AsRSG: pp. i-ii, 1-28
Bradley Martin, E. and Vigne, L. (1989). Kaziranga's calamity - a new threat to the Indianrhino. Oryx 23(3): 124-125.
Burger, J. (1990). Notes from the field: Kaziranga National Park, India. Buzzworm: theEnvironmental Journal 2(2): 20-21.
Champion, H.G. and Seth, H.K. (1968) Forest types of India. Manager of publications.
Government of India.
Choudhury, A. (1987). Railway threat to Kaziranga. Oryx 21: 160-163.
Choudhury, A. U. 1985c. A national park on the verge of death. World Wildlife Fund-India
Newsletter 6(1): 8-9.
Choudhury, A. U. 1985d. Distribution of Indian one-horned rhinoceros. Tigerpaper 12(2):25-30.
Choudhury, A. U. 1989. The Kaziranga Sanctuary. The India Magazine vol. 9 (January):
18-28pp. Delhi.
Choudhury, A. U. 1990. Checklist of the birds of Assam. Sofia Press & Publishers Pvt.
Ltd., Guwahati. 72 pp+ maps, illus.
Choudhury, A. U. 1990. The call of Kaziranga. Sun, February 24, XII(30):36. New Delhi.
Choudhury, A. U. 1993. A Naturalist in Karbi Anglong. Gibbon Books, Guwahati. Revised& enlarged 2nd edition in 2009.
Choudhury, A. U. 1993. Saving the Wild buffalo. The India Magazine. September. p.75.
New Delhi.
Choudhury, A. U. 1997. Survey of grasslands in some parts of central & southern Assam :to assess their biodiversity & socio-economic problem. WWF-India (a BCPP).
Choudhury, A. U. 1997b. The Barheaded goose in North-Eastern India and Bhutan.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 324 of 402

Journal of Ecological Society 10: 17-19. Pune.
Choudhury, A. U. 2000. Survey of grasslands in some parts of central and southern
Assam. In Setting biodiversity conservation priorities for India' ( eds. Singh, S. , Sastry, A.
R. K.. , Mehta, R. & Uppal, V.), Vol. I. 177-179. WWF - India, New Delhi.
Choudhury, A. U. 2000. The birds of Assam. Gibbon Books & WWF-India North East
Regional Office, Guwahati.
Choudhury, A. U. 2002. Current status and conservation of the Bengal Florican
Houbaropsis bengalensis in northeast India, pp. 90-94. In : Birds of wetlands andgrasslands : Proceedings of the Salim Ali Centenary Seminar on Conservation of
avifauna of wetlands and grasslands. Eds :Rahmani, A. R. and Ugra, G. Pp. x+228.
Bombay Natural History Society,Mumbai.
Choudhury, A. U. 2003. Kaziranga- wildlife in Assam. Rupa & Co., Delhi.
Choudhury, A. U. 2004. Birds of Kaziranga- a checklist. Gibbon Books & The Rhino
Foundation, Guwahati.
Choudhury, A. U. 2005. Kaziranga completes a hundred years. Ishani. 1(5): 25-28.
Choudhury, A. U. 2007a. J.C.Arbuthnott - Kaziranga's little known history! Airawat(Souvenir- 5th Kaziranga Elephant Festival). pp. 1-2.
Choudhury, A. U. 2007a. Sighting of large number of Short-toed Eagle Circaetus gallicus
and Greater Adjutant Leptoptilos dubius in Kaziranga National Park. Journal of Bombay
Natural History Society 104 (2) : 210.
Choudhury, A.U. 1994. The decline of Wild water buffalo in Northeastern India. Oryx
28(1): 70-73.
Choudhury, A.U. 1998. Flood havoc in Kaziranga. Pachyderm 26 : 83-87. Nairobi.
Choudhury, A.U. 1999. Status and Conservation of the Asian elephant Elephas maximus
in north-eastern India. Mammal Review 29(3): 141-173.
Choudhury, A.U. 2001. Devastating flood in Kaziranga National Park. Tigerpaper 28 (3):24-26.
Choudhury, A.U. 2004a. Kaziranga : land of Indian rhinos, elephants and tigers. Al-Bia
Wal- Tanmia (Environment & Development) 9(71): 38-43. Beirut, Lebanon. [in Arabic].
Choudhury, A.U. 2004b. Protection and Conservation of Kaziranga and Manas : World
Natural Heritage Sites in Assam, India through cooperation with local communities andresidents. Papers for Committee Meetings. Sirakami-Sanchi International Conference on
World Natural Heritage (SICWNH). Pp. 16-17. Aomori, Japan.
Choudhury, A.U. 2007b. Kaziranga. In : Asomiya Biswakosh. Vol. 8. Taher, M. and Ali, I.
(2007) (Eds.). Asom Sahitya Sabha, Guwahati. Pp. 477-480. [in Assamese].
Choudhury, Bhaskar; Dutta, Bijoy; Talukdar, Anjan; Shukla, Utkash; Smith, M.L. 2009
Formulating a working protocol for rescue and translocation of Greater One horned
rhinoceros based on experiences of three cases in India. Report (only available on the
Rhino Resource Center), pp. 1-9
Das, R. K. 1991. Assam : the main breeding ground of Spotbilled pelican. Newsletter for
Birdwatchers 31 (11 & 12) : 12-13. Bangalore.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 325 of 402

Das, R.K. 2005. Kaziranga : leaves from a forester's notebook. Spectrum Publications,
Guwahati.
Deb Roy, S. (1993) Rhino Conservation Action plan. Ministry of Environment and Forests.
Dinerstein E & Mccracken G.F. 1990. Endangered Great One Horned Rhinoceros CarryHigh levels of genetic variations. Conservation Biology, Vol. 4. No. 4.
Divekar, H.K., Mohapatra, K.K. and Shekar, P.B. (1980). Some observations on wild
buffalo, Bubalus bubalus Linn., in Kaziranga National Park, Assam. Journal of theBombay Natural History Society 79: 188-190.
Futehally, Z. 2007 (Ed.). India through its birds. Dronequill Publishers Pvt. Ltd.,
Bangalore.
Gauntlett, F. M. 1971. Kaziranga for birds. Newsletter for Birdwatchers 11 (1): 4-8.
Bangalore.
Gee, E.P. (1952). The Great Indian One-Horned Rhinoceros.Journal of the Bengal
Natural History Society.
Gee, E.P. (1964). The wildlife of India. Collins, London.
Gokhale, N. and Kashyap, S. 2005. Kaziranga: The Rhino Century, Kaziranga Centenary
Celebration Committee, Guwahati, 2005
Hajra, P.K. and S.K. Jain (1985). Botany of Manas and Kaziranga National park.
Dehradun.
Hornbuckle, J., Allen, D., Holt, P. and Kazmierczak, K. 1998. Northeast India : 20
February-13 March 1998. Bird list.
Islam, M.H. (1974). Floods in Kaziranga. Oryx 12: 450-451.
Islam, Z. and Rahmani, A.R. (eds.) 2004. Important Bird Areas in India. Bombay Natural
History Society, Mumbai and BirdLife International, Cambridge, U.K.
IUCN; Traffic; WWF, 2009. Status, conservation and trade in African and Asianrhinoceroses . Report SC58 Inf 10 to CITES Fifty-eighth meeting of the Standing
Committee Geneva (Switzerland), 6-10 July 2009, pp. 1-5
Jackman, B. (1996) The Thin Green Line Telegraph Magazine 19/10/96
Jain, S.K. and Sastry, A.R.K. (1983). Botany of some tiger habitats in India. Botanical
Survey of India, Howrah. p71
Karanth, K.U and Nichols, J.D (1998) Estimation of tiger densities in India using
photographing captures and recaptures. Ecology 79 (8).2852-2862.
Kastberger, G (1997) Honey Bee (Apis dorsata) Project.Institute of Zoology, University ofGraz, Austria.
Kushwaha, S,P.S and Unni, N.V,M (1986) Applications of the Remote Sensing techniquesin forest cover monitoring and habitat evaluation: a case study of Kaziranga National Park
Assam.
Kushwaha, S.P.S., Roy, P.S., Azeem, A., Boruah, P. And Lahan, P. (2000). Land areachange and rhino habitat suitability analysis in Kaziranga National Park, Assam. Tiger
paper. Vol. XXVII. No.2

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 326 of 402

Lahan, P and Sonowal (1973) Kaziranga Wildlife Sanctuary. Assam. Journal of Bombay
Natural History Society 70 (2): 245-278.
Lahan, P. (1993) Present status and distribution of The Indian Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros
unicornis) in the wild in Assam and its habitat. Assam Forest Department.
Laurie, W.A. (1978). The ecology and behaviour of the greater one-horned rhinoceros.
Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge, UK.
Mackenzie, M. 1969. A midwinter waterfowl count at Kaziranga. Cheetal : 16-20. Dehra
Dun.
Manoj Kumar Misra 2005. Improving Protection and Building Capacity off Staffs At
Kaziranga National Park. Technical Report No.4. UNESCO-IUCN-WII
Martin , E.B. and Vigne, L. (1991). Assam's rhinos face new poaching threats. Oryx
25:215-221.
Martina M. I. Di Fonzo 2007. Determining correlates of Human-elephant conflict reports
within fringe villages of Kaziranga National Park, AssamMartins, R. 1994. Ornitholidays, Bhutan and Assam, 18 November - 05 December 1994.
Milne R.C. (1997) Mission Report: South Asia meeting to review status conservation ofworld natural heritage and design and cooperative plan of action. 16-19 January 1997,
New Delhi, India. Prepared for the World Heritage Centre, UNESCO. Unpublished
Report, 7pp.
Muley.P (2001) Genetic and morphometric studies to differentiate between wild anddomestic Asian water buffaloes (Bubalus bbubalis) and their hybrids in Kaziranga
National Park. Assam India. Ph.D Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Naoroji, R. 2006. Birds of prey of the Indian subcontinent. OM Books International, New
Delhi.
Narayan, G., Sankaran, R., Rosalind, L and Rahmani, A.R. (1989). The Floricans
Houbaropsis bengalensis and Sypheotides indica. Annual Report 1988-89. Bombay
Natural History Society. 39 pp.
Neog, D. 1957. Mass movement of pelicans. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society
49: 791.
Panigrahhy, S. And Parihar (?). Changes in morphology of Brahmaputra River along theKaziranga National Park- An analysis of multi year Remote Sensing data. A report ofSpace Application Centre Ahbedabad.
Parashar, D. 2007. Kaziranga. Lawyers Book Stall, Guwahati
Parihar, J.S., Panigrahy, S. and Parihar, J.S. (1986). Remote sensing based habitat
assessment of Kaziranga National Park. In, Kamat, D.S. and Panwar, H.S. (Eds), Wildlife
habitat evaluation using remote sensing techniques. Indian Institute of Remote
Sensing/Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun. Pp. 157-164.
Patar, K.C. (1980) Life history and economic value of the One-horned Rhinoceros(Rhinoceros unicornis) in Kaziranga National Park. Assam. India. Tropical Ecology andDevelopment. 329-332.
Patar, K.C. (1980). Life history and economic value of the One-Horned Indian Rhinoceros
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 327 of 402

(Rhinoceros unicornis) in Kaziranga National Park. Assam. Tropical Ecology andevelpoment:329-332.
Rahmani, A., Narayan, G., Rosalind, L., Sankaran, R., & Ganguli-Lachungpa, U. 1992.
Status of the Bengal florican in India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society 88: 349375.
Rahmani, A.R., Narayan, G., Sankaran, R. and Rosalind, R. (1988). The Bengal Floricanstatus and ecology. Annual Report. 1986-1987.
Ranjitsinh, M. K. (1988). Kaziranga off threatened list. CNPPA Newsletter No. 44. IUCN,
Gland. Pp. 2.
Redman, N. 1989. Birdquest tour to Sikkim, Darjeeling & Assam, 11 March - 1 April 1989.
+ some more reports.
Rodgers, Alan, W., Panwar, H.S. and Mathur, V.B. (2002). Wildlife protected area network
in India: A review (executive sumary). Wildlife Institute Of India. Dehradun.
Sahgal, B. and Barthakur, R. 2004. Kaziranga inheritance. Sanctuary, Mumbai.
Sarma, P.; Talukdar, B.K. 2008 Changing rhino habitats in Assam and geospatial analysis:p. 13 In: Syangden, B. et al. Report on the regional meeting for India and Nepal
IUCN/SSC Asian Rhino Species Group (AsRSG); March 5-7, 2007 Kaziranga National
Park, Assam, India. Kaziranga, AsRSG: pp. i-ii, 1-28
Sawarkar, V.B.( 1995) A manual for Planning wildlife Management in Protected areas andManaged forests. Wildlife Institute of India.
Scott, D.A. (Ed.) (1989). A directory of Asian wetlands. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland andCambridge, UK. 1,181 pp.
Seshadri, B. 1969. The twilight of India's wild life. John Baker, London.
Shahi, S.P. (1983). Rhino poaching in Kaziranga. WWF India Newsletter 45: 5-6.
Sharma, R. (2002).Conservation of One Horned Rhinoceros in Assam- Strengthening of
Enforcement & Legal proceeding, in illegal trade & other offences. A report.
Spillet, J.J. (1966)A Report on Wildlife surveys in North India and Southern Nepal.
Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society. 63 (3):492-628.
Spillett, J.J. (1966). A report on wild life surveys in North India and southern Nepal: theKaziranga Wild Life Sanctuary, Assam. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 63:494-533.
Srivastava, R.J. (2002) Natural Resources uses and park-people relations at Kaziranga
National Park and world heritage site, India. MSc.Thesis. University of Florida.
Stevens, H. 1915. Notes on the birds of upper Assam. Journal of Bombay Natural History
Society 23: 234 -268 , 547- 570, 721-736.
Stracey, P. D. 1963. Wild Life in India : its conservation & control. Ministry of Food &Agriculture, Dept. of Agriculture, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
Syangden, B.; Sectionov; Ellis, S.; Williams, A.C.; Strien, N.J. van; Talukdar, B.K. 2008
Report on the regional meeting for India and Nepal IUCN/SSC Asian Rhino Species
Group (AsRSG); March 5-7, 2007 Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India. Kaziranga,
AsRSG, pp. i-ii, 1-28
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 328 of 402

Talukdar, B. 1995. Pelicans fail to nest as normal at Kaziranga NP in 1994. Oryx 29: 157.
Talukdar, B.K. (1994). Rhino poaching- a major threat to Kaziranga National Park.
Talukdar, B.K. 2009 Report on the current status of Rhinoceros unicornis: pp. 5-14 In:
Basel Zoo et al. International studbook for the greater one-horned or Indian rhinoceros,
Rhinoceros unicornis, 31 December 2008. Basel, Zoologischer Garten: pp. 1-58
Talukdar, B.N. 2008 Rhino census methodology: p. 12 In: Syangden, B. et al. Report on
the regional meeting for India and Nepal IUCN/SSC Asian Rhino Species Group(AsRSG); March 5-7, 2007 Kaziranga National Park, Assam, India. Kaziranga, AsRSG:
pp. i-ii, 1-28
The Asiatic wild buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) in Kaziranga National Park, Assam : Population
genetics and ecology for its management. (Dr.P.K.Mathur, Wildlife Institute of India,
Derhadun) From 02.02.89 to 1.01.95
Thom, M. 1965. Bengal Florican in the Kaziranga sanctuary, Assam. Newsletter for
Birdwatchers 5 (7): 9. Bangalore.
Tiwari, S.K., Karyong, S.S., Sarkar, P., Choudhury, A.U. and Williams, A.C. 2005.
Elephant corridors of North-eastern India. In : Right of Passage: Elephant corridors ofIndia. Menon, V., Tiwari, S.K., Easa, P.S. and Sukumar, R. (2005) (Eds.). Conservation
Reference Series 3. Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi. Pp. 154-206.
UNESCO, 2002. Periodic Reporting Exercise on the Application of the World Heritage
Convention Section II: State of conservation of specific World Heritage properties
V. Menon (1996) Under siege: poaching and protection of greater One-horned Rhino inIndia. Traffic network report.
Vigne, L and Martin, E.B. (1989). Kaziranga's calamity: a new threat to the Indian Rhino.
Oryx 23:124-125.
Vigne, L. et al., 2009. Traders from Nagaland threaten Assam's rhinos. International Zoo
News 56 (3): 166-167

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 329 of 402

GOVERNMENT OF ASSAMKAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKDETAILED REPORTONISSUES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONSFORLONG TERM PROTECTIONOF

THE GREATER ONE HORNEDRHINOCEROSIN

KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARKPURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF

THE HON'BLE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

PART IIIPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 330 of 402

GREEN WARRIORS OF KAZIRANGA
NameContribution

Year

B. Fuller

Chief Commissioner, Assam, who suggested establishing an asylum for rhinos

1902

J. C. Arbuthnot

The pioneer who expressed concern on declining animal population in Kaziranga

1902

Major Gurdon

He surveyed the area for the proposed Reserved Forest of Kaziranga and prepared
the trace map of the area

1903

BalaramHazarika

Also known Nigona Shikari. He was the guide mahout during the visit of Lady Curzon,
and it was him who motivated her to stop the sahibs from killing rhinos. His
grandson, Sri Bapiram Hazarika was honoured along with Nicholas Moszley, 3rd Baron

1905

of Ravensdale during the Kaziranga Centenary Celebrations in 2005

Lady Curzon

Whose maiden visit to Kaziranga and legendary love for wildlife helped the birth of
Kaziranga conservation saga

1905

H CarterConservator of Forests, Eastern Assam. Banned hunting etc.

1908

Major A. Playfair Forest Settlement Oicer & DC, Sibsagar

1913

W. F. L. Totton

Conservator of Forests, Eastern Assam. Declared the Kaziranga RF as Game
Sanctuary

1916

Mahi Chandra
Miri

Got into the Imperial Forest Service in 1929. 1st Indian IFS oicer in Kaziranga, andjoined Kaziranga as Extra Assistant Conservator of Forests in 1934 at Bagori

1934

A. J. W. Milroy

He opened the Kaziranga Game Sanctuary for visitors

1938

E. P. GeeHe put the Kaziranga on the world map, and was one of the irst to enter Kaziranga
as a visitor, and pressed for rhino census.

1939

RustomPhirozsha

First to take aerial photography of Kaziranga

1949

P. D. Stracey

Ordered the Game Sanctuary to be named as Kaziranga Wildlife Sanctuary

1950

Padmashri Dr.
Robin Banerjee

His movie called “Kaziranga”was of international acclaim, which was also the irst
movie on Kaziranga

1961

J. Juan Spillet

He conducted the 1st animal census

1966

P. Barua

Chief Conservator of Forests. Initiated the process of declaring Kaziranga as a
National Park1968

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 331 of 402

Sl
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

12
13
14
15
16

INCUMBENCY LIST OF DIRECTOR, KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARK
Name of Officers
Designation
Period of posting/ Charge
From
To
Mr P. N. Lahon
IFS
28-07-1984
07-07-1987
Mr. S. DoleyIFS
08-07-1987
21-01-1992
Mr. B. S. Bonal
IFS
22-01-1992
01-12-1992(Acting)
Mr. S. K. Sen
IFS
02-12-1992
10-07-1996
Mr. B. S. Bonal
IFS
10-07-1996
04-08-2000
Mr. D. M. Singh
IFS
05-08-2000
01-12-2001
Mr. N. K. Vasu
IFS
01-12-2001
01-06-2006
Mr. U. Bora
IFS
01-06-2006
06-07-2006(Acting)
Mr. D. M. Singh
IFS
06-07-2006
02-03-2007
Mr. S. N. Buragohain
IFS
02-03-2007
30-04-2010
Mr. Surajit Dutta
IFS
30-04-2010
29-03-2012
Mr. Surajit Dutta
IFS30-03-2012
31-03-2012
C.C.F.
Mr. S. K. Bora
IFS
31-03-2012
29-09-2012
Mr. N. K. Vasu
IFS
29-09-2012
16-12-2013
C.C.F.
Mr. M. K. Yadava
IFS
16-12-2013
10-02-2014
C.C.F.
Mr. N. K. Vasu
IFS
10-02-2014
10-02-2014
C.C.F.
Mr. M. K. Yadava
IFS
10-02-2014
C.C.F.

INCUMBENCY LIST OF DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICERS OF EASTERN ASSAMWILDLIFE DIVISION, BOKAKHATName of Officers
Designation
Period of posting
From
To
Mr L.C. Das
AFS
23-11-1966
08-07-1968
Mr N.C. Chakraborty
IFS
09-07-1968
06-03-1969
Mr S. Debroy
IFS
07-03-1969
12-05-1971
Mr P.N. Lahan
AFS
12-05-1971
28-02-1972
Mr H.C. Chakraborty
IFS
29-02-1972
20-03-1972
Mr P.N. Lahan
AFS
20-03-1972
25-12-1975
Mr K.C. Pator
AFS
26-12-1975
17-08-1977
Mr A.C. Gohain
W.L. Warden
18-08-1977
16-11-1977
Mr K.C. Pator
AFS
17-11-1977
06-06-1978
Mr P.D. Neog
AFS
07-06-1978
07-08-1978
Mr B.N. Pathak
AFS
08-08-1978
07-03-1979
Mr M.K. Sinha
AFS
07-03-1979
21-08-1980
Mr S.N. Buragohain
AFS
22-07-1980
09-01-1981
Mr D.G. Baruah
AFS
10-01-1981
04-05-1981
Mr L.D. Adhikari
AFS
05-05-1981
11-06-1981
Mr D.G. Baruah
AFS
12-06-1981
08-01-1984

Sl
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 332 of 402

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

Mr P.N. Lahan
Mr P.N. Lahan (Director,
KNP)
Mr K.K. Gohain
Mr P.N. Lahan
Mr M.M. Sarma
Mr R.N. Sonowal
Mr S. Ahmed
Mr B.S. Bonal
Mr C.R. Bhobora
Mr A. Dey, (ACF)
Dr. R.D.S. Tanwar
Mr P.S. Das
Mr A.C. Das
Mr R.K. Das
Mr Utpal Bora
Mr Bankim Sarma
Mr D.D. Gogoi
Mr S. K. Seal Sarma
Mr S. K. Seal Sarma

PIL 66/2012

IFS
IFS

09-01-1984
28-07-1984

27-07-1984
26-09-1985

IFS
IFS
IFS
AFS
AFS
IFS
AFS
AFS
IFS
IFS
AFS
AFS
IFS
AFS
AFS
AFS
IFS

27-09-1985
30-12-1985
12-04-1986
16-12-1986
31-05-1989
30-03-1990
27-09-1993
08-03-1996
11-03-1996
02-01-1998
14-09-2001
13-08-2003
15-09-2004
01-08-2007
07-05-2008
11-02-2013
11-07-2014

30-12-1985
11-04-1986
15-12-1986
31-05-1989
30-03-1990
27-09-1993
08-03-1996
11-03-1996
02-01-1998
14-09-2001
13-08-2003
15-09-2004
01-08-2007
07-05-2008
11-02-2013
11-07-2014

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 333 of 402

Name of Officers in Charge of Kaziranga Range, Kohora
SL
No
1

From

To

Babu H.K. Dastidhar

Name

Deputy Ranger

01-04-1949

26-10-1949

2

Sri G.C. Thakuria

Forest Ranger

26-10-1949

19-11-1951

3

R.C. Das

Forest Ranger

19-11-1951

09-09-1956

4

B.C. Baruah

Deputy Ranger

09-09-1956

25-09-1956

5

R.C. Das

Forest Ranger

25-09-1956

29-10-1956

6

R.C. Das

ACF

30-10-1956

09-07-1957

7

S.P. Choudhury

Forest Ranger

09-07-1957

08-07-1959

8

P. C. Kalita

Forest Ranger

08-07-1959

27-02-1961

9

H. C. Changkakati

ACF

27-02-1961

17-05-1961

10

K.N. Gogoi

Forest Ranger

17-05-1961

31-07-1962

11

M.N. Adhikari

Forest Ranger

31-07-1962

10-11-1964

12

C.L. Chakraborty

Forest Ranger

10-11-1964

13-03-1968

13

R.N. Sonowal

Forest Ranger

13-03-1968

13-05-1981

14

R.N. Sonowal

ACF

14-05-1981

31-10-1981

15

G. Saikia

Forest Ranger

31-10-1981

09-11-1990

16

K.K. Medhi

Forest Ranger

09-11-1990

09-06-1993

17

D.D. Gogoi

ACF

09-06-1993

14-07-1995

18

A.Dey

ACF

14-07-1995

18-08-1995

19

B.N. Talukdar

DDR

18-08-1995

28-12-1996

20

D.D. Boro

Forest Ranger

28-12-1996

14-10-2009

21

K.K. Deori

Forest Ranger

14-10-2009

30-10-2009

22

A.Rahman

Forest Ranger

30-10-2009

27-08-2012

23

L.C. Gogoi

Forest Ranger (AFS)

27-08-2012

04-03-2013

24

M. Tamuly

Forest Ranger (AFS)

04-03-2013

PIL 66/2012

Designation

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 334 of 402

Name of Officers in Charge of Western Range, Baguri
SL
No
1

From

To

Sri Thaneswar Das

Name

Forest Ranger

Designation

29-07-1980

04-12-1980

2

Sri Gautam Saikia

Forest Ranger

04-12-1980

25-02-1982

3

Sri Horendra Nath Kalita

Forest Ranger

25-02-1982

01-11-1983

4

Sri Narayan Ch Sarmah

Forest Ranger

01-11-1983

28-06-1989

5

Sri Dharanidhar Boro

Forest Ranger

28-06-1989

16-08-1989

6

Sri Narayan Ch. Sharma

Forest Ranger

16-08-1989

04-10-1990

7

Sri Mahat Ch. Talukdar

Forest Ranger

04-10-1990

27-01-1993

8

Sri Pankaj Sarma

Forest Ranger

27-01-1993

20-10-1997

9

Sri Ranjit Kr. Dutta

Forest Ranger

20-10-1997

19-06-1998

10

Sri Jiten Bora

Forest Ranger

19-06-1998

25-01-2000

11

Sri Bidyot Borthakukr

Forest Ranger

25-01-2000

09-10-2000

12

Sri Mukul Tamuly

Forest Ranger

09-10-2000

14-06-2005

13

Sri Dharanidhar BoroAFS

14-06-2005

16-08-2005

14

Sri Mojuj Kr. Das

AFS

16-08-2005

13-12-2005

15

Sri Pallab Kr. Deka

AFS

13-12-2005

20-08-2008

16

Sri Deben Kalita

AFS

20-08-2008

30-07-2012

17

Sri Kushal Kuwar Deka

AFS

30-07-2012

04-03-201318

Sri Pradipta Baruah

ACF

04-03-2013

Till Date

Name of Officers in Charge of Eastern Range, Agoratoli
SL
No
1

Name
Sri A.C. Kalita

2

Sri K.N. Mahanta

Forest Ranger

30-11-1981

13-12-1982

3

Sri T. Ahmed

Forest Ranger

13-12-1982

03-11-1986

4

Sri S.K. Basumatary

Forest Ranger

03-11-1986

21-11-1989

5

Sri M.C. Talukdar

Forest Ranger

21-11-1989

04-10-1990

6

Sri D. D. Boro

Forest Ranger

04-10-1990

07-01-1997

7

Sri L.N. Baruah

ACF

07-01-1997

22-12-1997

PIL 66/2012

Designation
Forest Ranger

From

To

20-11-1980

30-11-1981

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 335 of 402

8

Sri M. Tamuly

Forest Ranger

22-12-1997

09-10-2000

9Sri Salim Ahmed

Forest Ranger

09-10-2000

27-04-2005

10

Sri P. Baruah

Forest Ranger

27-04-2005

13-12-2006

11

Sri D. Baruah

Forest Ranger

13-12-2006

12-03-2007

12

Sri Tralukya Bhuyan

Forest Ranger

12-03-2007

05-11-200913

Sri K.K. Deori

Forest Ranger

05-11-2009

16-08-2012

14

Sri D. Baishya

Forest Ranger

16-08-2012

04-03-201315

Sri Salim Ahmed

Forest Ranger

04-03-2013

Name of Officers in Charge of Burapahar Range, Ghorakati
Name
Designation
From

SL
No
1

Sri Ranjit Konwar

2

Sri Pankaj Sarma

Forest Ranger

14-06-1993

01-07-1993

3

Sri Ranjit Konwar

Forest Ranger

01-07-1993

09-07-1993

4

Sri Sailen Das

Forest Ranger

09-07-1993

06-06-1997

5

Sri F. Ali

Forest Ranger

06-06-1997

31-03-1999

6

Sri Kamal Kr. Medhi

Forest Ranger

31-03-1999

06-07-1999

7

Sri Utpal Bora, IFS

ACF

06-07-1999

23-10-1999

8

Sri Kamal Kr. Medhi

Forest Ranger

23-10-1999

28-05-2002

9

Sri Mukul Tamuly

Forest Ranger

28-05-2002

06-07-2002

10

Sri J. R. Barma

Forest Ranger

06-07-2002

27-11-2002

11

Ms. Sonali Gosh, IFS

ACF

27-11-2002

07-04-2003

12

Sri Mukul Tamuli

Forest Ranger

07-04-2003

22-10-2003

13

Sri Unis Salim

Forest Ranger

22-10-2003

05-03-2007

14

Sri I. Mazid

Forest Ranger

05-03-2007

03-02-201315

Sri J. R. Bordoloi

Forest Ranger

03-02-2013

PIL 66/2012

Forest Ranger

27-12-1990

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your FutureTo

14-06-1993

Page No. 336 of 402

Name of Officers in Charge of Northern Range, Biswanathghat
Name
Designation
From

SL
No
1

Sri Hemanta Bhuyan,

Forest Ranger

04-08-2009

30-06-2010

2

Sri Bhadra Kakoty

Forest Ranger

30-06-2010

01-02-2011

3

Sri Basanta Kakoty

Forest Ranger

01-02-2011

31-08-2013

4

Sri J. R. Das

Forest Ranger

31-08-2013

12-06-2014

5

Sri Puspadhar Borgohain

Forest Ranger

12-06-2014

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

To

Page No. 337 of 402

List of Deceased and Injured Staff On Duty
(We Salute You!)
SL
No
1

Date

Name of the Staff

Designation

Cause of Death/Injured

26-02-1968

Late Boluram Dutta

28-03-1975

Sri Katiram Das

331-03-1975

Sri Indreswar Bora

4

10-03-1983

Sri Pranab Pal

528-03-1985

Late Motiram Baruah

603-11-1986

Md. Ajad Hazarika

729-10-1989

Sri Jaygeswar Hazarika

811-02-1990

Sri Babul Mura

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Grass Cutter

Killed by poacher2929-12-1990

Md. Nasiruddin Ahmed

1029-01-1992

Sri Budha Dutta

1114-04-1992

Sri Amar Sing Deka

1229-08-1992

Sri Thaneswar Sarma

13

03-11-1992

Late Dharma Kt. Kalita

1414-03-1993

Sri Lila Kt. Saikia

1519-10-1993

Sri Anil Das

16

27-12-1993

Sri Apurba Deka

17

17-09-1994

Sri Ajit Boro

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
CL18

08-10-1994

Sri Amal Das

ML Driver

Injured by Rhino

1905-12-1994

Sri Hem. Kt. Gogoi

CL

Injured by Tiger

20

01-02-1995

Sri Nigru Karmakar

Grass Cutter

Injured by Rhino

PIL 66/2012

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Game Watcher

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Injured by Wild ElephantInjured by Rhino
Injured by Rhino
Killed by poacher
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Injured by Rhino
Injured by Rhino
Injured by Tiger
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Killed by Rhino
Injured by Rhino
Injured by Bear
Injured by Rhino
Injured in encounter

Page No. 338 of 402

21

08-01-1996

Sri Rajat Baruah

22

07-09-1996

Sri Dharmeswar Dutta

23

11-11-1996

Sri Ajit Saikia2427-05-1997

Sri Bhadreswar Gogoi

25

03-12-1997

Sri Rajen Bora

26

20-06-1998

Late Deben Chasa

2702-01-1999

28

Forest Guard(Fgd.)CL
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Mahut

Injured by Buffalo
Injured by Rhino
Injured in encounter
Injured by Wild Elephant

Sri Arun Rava

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Grass Cutter

Injured by Elephant14-07-1999

Sri Mohan Karmakar

CL

Injured by Rhino

29

12-11-1999

Sri Hemo Boro

Grass Cutter

Injured by Rhino30

15-03-2000

Late Niren Saikia

Killed by Rhino

31

06-10-2000

Sri Ratul Bora

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
CL

Injured by Wild Buffalo

32

07-03-2001

Sri Dandidhar Sonowal

Fr-I

Injured by Rhino

33

11-11-2001

Late Pradip Dutta

Drowned in water

34

02-12-2001

Sri Digen Bhoumik

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)

35

21-02-2002

Sri Ranjit Bora

36

07-03-2002

Md. Abidur Rahman

37

18-06-2002

38

20-06-2002

Sri Lambudhar
Chaoukham
Sri Lakhi Ghatowal

39

28-02-2003-

Sri Kishore Kurmi

40

10-04-2003

Sri Siba Saikia

41

10-04-2003

Sri Purna Kt. Neog

42

10-04-2003

Sri Praneswar Swargiari43

10-04-2003

Sri Gonesh Bora

PIL 66/2012

Inured by Rhino
Drowned in water

Injured by Rhino
Injured by Rhino

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Grass Cutter

Injured by Wild Buffalo

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Grass Cutter

Injured by ElephantForest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Injured by Rhino
Injured by Wild Buffalo

Injured by Rhino

Injured by Deptt. Bullet
Injured by Rhino
Injured by Rhino

Page No. 339 of 402

44

27-07-2003

Sri Padma Kt. Das

Boat Man

Injured by Rhino45

08-09-2003

Sri Pash Bhatta

Boat Man

Injured by Wild Buffalo

46

13-02-2004

Sri Horen Bora

Injured by Bear

47

13-03-2004

Sri Paban Sarma
Sri Satyban Pegu

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
CL

Injured by Tiger

Sri Deben Bordoloi

Game Watcher

Injured by Rhino

Late Gopal Bori

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
CL

Fell down from elephant backwhile on duty and sustained
injury and succumbed to death
Injured by Rhino

48
49

31-12-2004

50

Injured by Wild Buffalo

51

12-01-2005

Sri Sashi Saikia

52

04-02-2005

Late Babul Barua53

14-08-2005

Late Rajen Hazarika

54

02-01-2006

Sri Nripen Hazarika

55

14-02-2006

Sri Naba Kr. Neog

56

25-02-2006

Sri Khagen Phukan

57

02-05-2006

Late Kanbap Dutta

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Driver58

27-07-2006

Sri Manik Yein

AFPF

59

29-09-2006

Late Prabhat Saikia

Tourist Guard

Died on road accident while on
duty
sustained injuries in an
encounter
Killed by Elephant

60

02-01-2007

Sri Suresh Das

Game Watcher

Injured by Rhino

61

29-09-2007

Sri Putul Bora

62

18-01-2008

Sri Jurman NathForest Guard(Fgd.)
Fr-II

Injured by Rhino

63

07-02-2008

Sri Jadu Gogoi

Game Watcher

Injured by Rhino

64

08-02-2008

Md. Rajul Ali

Home-Guard

65

16-06-2008

Sri Padum Sarma

Fr-I

Injured in road accident while on
duty
Fell down form elephant backwhile on duty and sustained
injuryPIL 66/2012

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Fr-I

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Killed by Deptt. Elephant ‘Ramu’
Drowned in water
Injured by Rhino
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Injured by Rhino

Injured by Rhino

Page No. 340 of 402

66

19-06-2008

Sri Ratul Mahanta

Game Watcher

67

26-07-2008

Sri Purna Ch. Saikia

Forest Guard(Fgd.)

68

20-09-2008

Sri Ruhini Dutta

Game Watcher

69

19-11-2008

Late Ranjit Medhi

Home Guard

70

22-12-2008

Sri Indrswar Bora71

26-12-2008

Sri Sadagar Singh

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Driver72

03-01-2009

Sri Mukuta Gogoi

Fr-II

73

03-02-2009

Sri Dipak Bordoloi

74

23-02-2009

Sri Chandra Dhar Deka

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Tourist Guard

75

25-02-2009

Sri Phulen Kakoti

76

02-03-2009

Sri Tankeswar Gogoi

77

07-03-2009

Late Atul Bora

78

09-03-2009

Sri Amiya Lal Gohain

79

31-03-2009

Sri Bijoy Chetry

80

01-04-200981

Fell down from elephant backwhile faced with Rhino andsustained injury
Fell down from elephant backwhile faced with Rhino andsustained injury
Fell down from elephant backwhile combing operation
Killed by Rhino
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Knocked down by the vehicle on
NH-37
Injured by Rhino and died on 2306-09
Fell down from the camp
Injured by Rhino

Sri Birbahadur Chetry

Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Forest Guard(Fgd.)
Boat Man

Injured by Wild Buffalo

21-06-2009

Sri Uttam Rai

Home Guard

Injured by Elephant82

22-06-2009

Md. Allauddin Siddiq

Home Guard

Fell down form elephant back83

26-06-2009

Sri Rangbon Loying

Home Guard

Injured by Rhino84

18.10.2009

Dilip BoraOP

85

14.04.2010

Sibian Hemrom

Fgd

86

09-06-2010

Mohendra Karmakar

MahoutExpired in Road accident on NH37
Drowned in water inside thePark
Drowned water inside the Park8705-11-2010

Bhupen Paul

Boaman

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Injured by Rhino
Injured by Rhino
Killed by Rhino
Injured by Wild Buffalo
Injured by Rhino

Expired in Road accident on NH37

Page No. 341 of 402

8805-112010

Bimal Saikia

Home Guard

89

23-01-2011

Bharat Gogoi

Boatman9006-02-2011

Nitul Dutta

Home Guard

Expired in Road accident on NH37
Killed by Wild Buffalo inside thePark
Killed by rhino inside the Park91

20-02-2011

Karuna Kanta Das

Forest Guard

92

03-03-2011

Rabin Nath

Game Watcher

Expired in Road accident on NH37
Injured by rhino inside the Park93

07-04-2011

Bharat Ch Das

Forester-II

Killed by rhino inside the Park94

12-12-2011

Bakul NathBoatman

95

03-01-2012

Purna Barman

Forest Guard

Killed by wild elephant inside
the Park
Injured by rhino inside the Park96

09-01-2012

Suchandra Mahanta

AFPF Constable9709-02-2012

Prem Kr Pradhan

Forest Guard

98

28-02-2012

Bhagirathi Mahantee

Forest Guard

Killed by wild buffalo inside thePark
Injured by wild elephant inside
the Park
Injured by tiger outside the Park99

09-03-2012

Braja Kr Saikia

Game Watcher

Injured by rhino inside the Park100

06-03-2012

Ganesh Tarafdar

Chowkidar

Injured by rhino inside the Park101

18-03-2012

Jogeswar Baruah

BoatmanInjured by rhino inside the Park102

29-06-2012

Durjoy Bawri

Mahout103

15-08-2012

Bhaba Hazarika

Forester-II

Drowned in water inside thePark
Injured by rhino inside the Park104

09-04-2013

Kalyangiri Adhikari

Forest Guard

105

10-12-2013

Biren Dutta

Forest Guard

106

08-04-2014

Nilamoni Bora

Forest GuardPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Killed by wild buffalo inside theParkHeart Fail inside the Park
Expired in road accident on NH37

Page No. 342 of 402

Present Position of Departmental Elephant under Kaziranga Range, Kohora
Sl No

Name of Elephant

Bandh

Sex

Date of Birth

Date of Porcument

Microchip Number

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

Saraswati
MohanmalaPadmini
KartikRudra
RukminiMalatiKonwar
Konwari
Phulandevi
Phulmai
Rahul
Prithiraj
NunaimalaPradumnya
Lakhimai (Seized)
Moromi (Seized)
Airawat
Pawan
Joydev
Biswajit
Kazi
BoroshaRakhi
Mohan Prasad
Rosy
Purnima
Karna
Joy
Brishnu
ChandraArcharjya

MirikaKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraMirikaKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraMirikaKumuraMirikaKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumuraKumura

F
F
F
T
M
F
F
M
F
F
F
M
T
F
M
F
F
T
T
T
T
F
F
F
M
F
F
M
M
M

1965
1951
1973
1981
1981
1970
1992
1986
1981
1974
1992
1997
1998
1988
1999

23-06-1965
17-05-1970
15-05-1978
25-01-1981
25-04-1981
13-06-1982
24-12-1992
04-07-1994
04-07-1994
10-11-1994
27-03-1997
02-12-1997
14-11-1998
10-02-1999
28-04-1999

2001
2001
2003
2004
2005
2005
2008
2009
2013
2012
2013
2014

27-10-2001
15-12-2001
14-11-2003
19-09-2004
02-02-2005
23-07-2005
12-11-2008
22-12-2009
12-03-2013
28-12-2012
04-05-2013
09-01-2014

KumuraM

961 00 10000 06290
961 00 10000 05911
961 00 10000 05155
961 00 10000 03308
Nill
961 00 10000 05381
961 00 10000 03711
961 00 10000 03225
961 00 10000 05739
961 00 10000 03972
961 00 10000 05487
961 00 10000 03543
Nill
961 00 10000 05625
961 00 10000 04649
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill
Nill

31

2008

16-08-2008

LIST OF DEPARTMENTAL ELEPHANTS UNDER WESTERN RANGE, BAGORI
Sl.
No.
1
2
3

5

Name ofelephants
Krishna
Rohimola
LakhimiGaneshPrasadRupa

6

Junaki

NichlaFemale

-

7
8
9
10

Deepa
Padumi
BhadoiBiswajit

KumuraKumuraKumuraKumura26.10.2003
25.06.2004
15.09.2004
16.09.201111

Lakhimala

KumuraFemaleFemaleFemaleMale (calf)
Female(calf)

961 00 1000004853
This elephant was missing
from Burapahar Range andcaptured at Bimoli Camp
under
Western,
Range,
Bagori.
Microchip has not been done
-do-do-do-

05.10.2012

-do-

4

PIL 66/2012

Date of Birth

Bund

Sex

KumuraMirikaKumura

1972
1980
1991

MirikaFemaleFemaleFemaleMale(Tusker)
FemaleNichlaDate ofProcurement

1992-

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Microchip No.
961 00 1000003189
961 00 1000003235
961 00 1000005811
961 00 1000003215

Page No. 343 of 402

LIST OF DEPARTMENTAL ELEPHANTS UNDER EASTERN RANGE, AGORATOLI

Sl.
No.

Name ofelephants

Bund

Sex

Date of Birth

1
2
3
4
5

BhadoiPhaguni
JaymalaSamratSukracharya

MirikaKumoraMirikaKumoraMirika

F
F
F
M
M

1985
1986
1960
1988
1996

Date ofProcurement05.09.1985
24.02.1992
31.03.1993
22.07.1994
11.10.1996

6

RongmonMirikaM-

03.09.2011

7

Mohan

MirikaM-

08.12.2011

8
9
10
11

Droncharya
Kripacharya
Madhuri
BoroshaMirikaKumora
-

M
M
F
F

2008
2008
2013
2013

04.11.2008
18.11.2008
24.02.2013
25.04.2013

Microchip No.
961 00 1000004156
961 00 1000003257
961 00 1000003348
961 00 1000003745
961 00 1000001410
961 00 1000006225(Seized)Microchip not available.
Seized from Jorhat
Divn.
Microchip not done
-do-do-do-

Y E A R W IS E S T A T E M E N T O F A N IM A L M O R T A L I T Y O N N H . 3 7 U N D E R E A W L D I V I S I O N , B O K A K H A T
2010
R AN GEP L A C E OF O C C UR R A N C E

O F F C O R R ID O R

DATE

DAY

N IGH T1

1 4 /1 /2 0 1 0

01

H og d ee r

B PR

Ne a r R a n g e H e a d q u a rte rDay
0

N ig h t
1

Day
0

N ig h t
02

2 8 /1 /2 0 1 0

10

Ma c a q u e

BKT

Ne a r F a c tory of Me th on i T e a e s ta te

1

0

0

0

3

2 8 /1 /2 0 1 0

1

0

C ap p ed Len g u r

BKT

Ne a r Pa n b a ri c a m p

1

0

0

4
5
6
7
8
9

3 0 /6 /2 0 1 0
0 7 /0 1 /2 0 1 0
0 7 /0 6 /2 0 1 0
0 7 /0 9 /2 0 1 0
0 7 /1 0 /2 0 1 0
1 3 /7 /2 0 1 0

0
1
0
0
0
1

1
0
1
1
1
0

H og d ee r
H og d ee r ( In ju red )H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
Ma c a q u e

WR
WR
WR
KR
WR
BKT

Ne a r H a rm oi c a m p
Ne a r T u n ik a i
Ne a r K a n c h a n ju ri c a m p
Ne a r H a ld h ib a ri c a m p
Ne a r R a g in i H ote l
Ne a r S a lk a th on i

0
1
0
0
0
1

1
0
1
1
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1
0

10

1 3 /7 /2 0 1 0

10

H og d ee r

KR

Ne a r K e n y a m ora b rid g e

1

0

0

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

1 7 /7 /2 0 1 0
2 0 /7 /2 0 1 0
1 3 /9 /2 0 1 0
1 4 /9 /2 0 1 0
2 4 /9 /2 0 1 0
2 4 /9 /2 0 1 0
2 7 /9 /2 0 1 0
2 9 /9 /2 0 1 0
2 9 /9 /2 0 1 0
1 0 /0 1 /2 0 1 0
1 5 /1 0 /2 0 1 0
2 8 /1 1 /2 0 1 0
1 0 /1 2 /2 0 1 0
2 0 /1 2 /2 0 1 0
T ota l

1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
12

0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
12

W ild E le p h a n t
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
Porc u p in e
W ild b oa r
Ma c a q u e
C ap p ed Len g u r
H og d ee r

B PR
B PR
B PR
WR
KR
WR
B PR
WR
KR
KR
WR
BKT
BKT
WR

Ne a r T e tu lg u ri
Ne a r C h ia n g p a h a r
Ne a r Ne h e ru b a s i
Ne a r 1 No.H a rm oi
E a s t of H a ld h ib a ri c a m p
Ne a r B u ra p a h a r W a ii n g s h ed
Ne a r S a d h u b h ei
Ne a r Ma lon i C a m p
Ne a r H a ld h ib a ri c a m p
E a s t of H a ld h ib a ri B O
Ne a r K a n c h a n ju ri g a te
Ne a r B ok a k h a t B oy s ' S c h ool
At B og oriju ri
Ne a r Na h a rd a n g a

0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
7

0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
8

1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
5

PIL 66/2012

A N IMA L S P EC IE S

O N C O R R ID O R

S L NO

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 344 of 402

0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4

2011
SL NO

DATE

DAY

N IG H T

25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34

2 2 /2 /2 0 1 1
2 3 /4 /2 0 1 1
1 9 /5 /2 0 1 1
2 0 /7 /2 0 1 1
2 6 /7 /2 0 1 1
2 2 /8 /2 0 1 1
0 9 /0 8 /2 0 1 1
0 9 /0 8 /2 0 1 1
1 7 /1 0 /2 0 1 1
1 2 /0 9 /2 0 1 1
T ota l

0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
5

1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
5

A N IMA L S P E C IE S
B a rk in g D e e r
C ap p ed Leng u r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
W ild b oa r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r

R ANGEP L AC E OF OC C UR R AN CE

KR
KR
B PR
WR
BK T
WR
WR
WR
B PR
B PR

Ne a r D u rg a p u r S iv a Ma n d ir
Ne a r H a ld h ib a ri c a m p
Ne a r S a ra li c a m p
W e s t of K a n c h a n ju ri c a m p
Ne a r S a lk a th on i
Ne a r B a g ori oil p u m p
Ne a r Na h a rd a n g a
Ne a r H a rm oi c a m p
Ne a r B u ra p a h a r R a n g e H e a d Q u a rte r
Ne a r S a m d a n g a

O N C OR R IDOR
Day
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
3

N ig h t
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
3

O F F C O R R IDO R
Day
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2

N ig h t
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2

2012
DATE

DAY

N IGH T

35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57

2 0 /1 /2 0 1 2
1 5 /4 /2 0 1 2
1 9 /5 /2 0 1 2
0 6 /0 6 /2 0 1 2
0 6 /1 2 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 7 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 8 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 8 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 8 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 8 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 9 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 9 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 9 /6 /2 0 1 2
2 1 /7 /2 0 1 2
2 4 /7 /2 0 1 2
2 9 /7 /2 0 1 2
0 8 /0 4 /2 0 1 2

0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0

1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1

C a p p e d L en g u r
Py th onH og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
W ild B oa r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r

BKT
KR
WR
WR
B PR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
BKT
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
WR
KR
B PR
KR
WR
WR

Ne a r Me th on i T e a -E s ta te
Ne a r H a ld h ib a ri B .O .
Ne a r B a g h m a ri v illa g e
Ne a r Ma lon i C a m p
Ne a r A m g u ri
Ne a r K a n c h a n ju ri
Ne a r H a rm oi c a m p
Ne a r B a g ori oil p u m p
Ne a r B a g ori oil p u m p
Ne a r F ore s t c olon y
In fron t of PW D IB
Ne a r S a lk a th on iD u a r B a g ori B rid g e
D u a r B a g ori B rid g e
E a s t of D e op a n i B rid g e
Ne a r B a g h m a ri v illa g e
Ne a r K a li Mon d ir
Ne a r K u th ori L P S c h ool
Ne a r Me th on i T e a -E s ta te
Ne a r C h ia n g p a h a r
Ne a r R a n g a ja n T e a - E s ta te
Ne a r H a rm oi
W e s t of H a rm oi c a m p

58

1 9 /8 /2 0 1 2

01

H og d ee rKR

E a s t of NR L O il Pu m p

0

0

0

1

59

1 9 /8 /2 0 1 2

01

H og d ee rKR

E a s t of NR L O il Pu m p

0

0

0

1

60

2 3 /8 /2 0 1 2

01

H og d ee r

KR

Ne a r L a lita H otel

0

0

0

1

61

0 9 /0 1 /2 0 1 2

1

0

H og d ee r

WR

Ne a r H a rm oi c a m p

1

0

0

62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

0 9 /1 0 /2 0 1 2
0 9 /1 0 /2 0 1 2
2 4 /9 /2 0 1 2
2 5 /9 /2 0 1 2
1 0 /0 3 /2 0 1 2
1 1 /0 6 /2 0 1 2
1 1 /0 8 /2 0 1 2
2 2 /1 1 /2 0 1 2
2 8 /1 1 /2 0 1 2
1 2 /1 0 /2 0 1 2
1 5 /1 2 /2 0 1 2
Tota l

1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
12

0
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
26

H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
S wa m p d ee r ( In ju re d )H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
H og d ee r
Porc u p in e
H og d ee r
B a rk in g D ee r

KR
KR
BKT
BKT
B PR
WR
BKT
WR
KR
WR
KR

Ne a r L a ld h a s n a
Ne a r L a ld h a s n a
Ne a r Me th on i T e a -E s ta te
Ne a r Pa n b a ri
Ne a r A m g u ri
Ne a r N u rs e ry
Ne a r S a lk a th on i
Ne a r D u s u i c a m p
Ne a r G e le k i g a on
E a s t of R a n g e H e a d Q u a rte r
Ne a r H a i k h u li T e a -E s ta te

1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
8

0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
8

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4

0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
18

PIL 66/2012

A N IMA L S P E C IE S

R AN GEP L A C E O F O C C UR R A N C E

O N C O R R ID O R O F F C O R R ID O RDay
N ig h t D a y
N ig h t
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

SL NO

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 345 of 402

2013
SL NO

DATE

DA Y

N IGH T

73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98

1 6 /1 /2 0 1 3
0 2 /1 1 /2 0 1 3
0 4 /0 8 /2 0 1 3
0 5 /0 7 /2 0 1 3
1 8 /5 /2 0 1 3
1 7 /6 /2 0 1 3
2 3 /6 /2 0 1 3
2 9 /6 /2 0 1 3
0 7 /1 1 /2 0 1 3
0 7 /1 2 /2 0 1 3
0 8 /0 7 /2 0 1 3
2 9 /8 /2 0 1 3
0 9 /0 7 /2 0 1 3
0 9 /0 8 /2 0 1 3
0 9 /1 0 /2 0 1 3
0 9 /1 2 /2 0 1 3
1 4 /9 /2 0 1 3
1 5 /9 /2 0 1 3
1 9 /9 /2 0 1 3
2 3 /9 /2 0 1 3
2 5 /9 /2 0 1 3
2 7 /9 /2 0 1 3
1 0 /0 3 /2 0 1 3
2 1 /1 0 /2 0 1 3
1 1 /0 5 /2 0 1 3
1 1 /1 2 /2 0 1 3
T ota l

0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
7

1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
19

PIL 66/2012

A N IMA L S P E C IE S
L e op a rd
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
C ap ped Leng ur
H ooloc k g ib b on
H og d e e r
Ju n g le ca t
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
H og d e e r
T u rtle
W ild B oa r
C ap ped Leng ur

R ANGE

PL ACE OF OCCUR R ANC E

KR
BK T
B PR
WR
WR
WR
WR
KR
B PR
WR
WR
WR
KR
WR
B PR
WR
WR
KR
KR
KR
WR
WR
KR
BR
KR
KR

W e s t of C h e p e n a k u b u a Na m g h a r
Ne a r Pu ra d olon g
B e twee n G h ora k a i a n d R h in o la n d Pa rk
Ne a r Ma lon i C a m p
Ne a r N a h a rd a n g a
Ne a r Ma lon i C a m p
E a s t of D u a rb a g ori Polic e O u t p os t
Ne a r B og oriju ri g a on
Ne a r Am g u ri
Ne a r H a rm oi tu rn n in g
Ne a r Ma lon i C a m p
Ne a r H a rm oi
W e s t of E a s t H a ld h ib a ri c a m p
Ne a r H a rm oi c a m p
Ne a r G L R e s ort
Ne a r H a rm oi c a m p
Ne a r H a rm oi tu rn n in g
W e s t of H a ld h ib a ri
Ne a r R a n g a ja n T e a -e s ta te
Ne a r K oh ora C h a ria li
Ne a r N a h a rd a n g a
E a s t of R a n g e H e a d Q u a rter
Ne a r R a n g a ja n T e a - E s ta te
W e s t of R h in o la n d Pa rk
Ne a r B og oriju ri g a on
Ne a r L a ld h a s n a

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

O N C O R R ID O R O F F C O R R ID O RDay
N ig h t D a y
N ig h t
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
9
2
10

Page No. 346 of 402

List of Anti Poaching Camps in Kaziranga National Park
Sl
No

Name of the CampSl.
No

Name of theCamp

A. Central Range, Kohora

Sl
No

Name of the CampSl.
No

Name of the Camp

C. Eastern Range, Agaratoli

123

MihimukhBenga
Goroimari

27
28
29

Naobhangi
Solmara tongiThungru

1
2
3

Dhoba
Mohkhui
Dhanbari

19
20
21

Natunbeel
Tinibeel
Pahumari

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Bordoloni
LaudubI
Teteliguri
JamuguriDusui
TajengBhengrai
Holalpath
BarunikaSolmoraBorbeelBokabeel
Hldibari East
Haldibari
Sildubi
Paharline

30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45

Kholkholi
Kaziranga Beat
Lengtajan
Baghmari
Tilaidubi
TazengBherbheri
Naromora
Bheroni
Mikirjan
Naharkathoni
Bejbejia
Korne
AlubariBokporaKerasing

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

BalijanTurturoni
MohporaMaklungRongamoia
Anhotguri
Rajamari
Soba
Balipukhuri
Debeswari
ErasuiHaichora
Dighali
Sebe tapu
Sapekhai

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

Duramari
SoholaSohola tongi
Mowamari
Nolani
Tamulipathar
Siga
Siga tongi
SukaniArikaiDimow
Cobra
Karika chapori
Samrat loaing

20
21
22
23
24
25
26

ArimoraHanumanGobraiKarikaAjogorDhekiatoli
Methonmari

46
47
48
49
50
51

Buloni
Naste
Monatongi
Karika Floaing
Bhinhdia
Kathonibari

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Tunikai
Lohorani 2
Janta
Phulaguri
ChirangBorholaBorghop
Difalu

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Maite
Baneswar
Rangalu
Panijuri
Kathalchang
MakbulBaneswar Mandir
Haibalu

BahubeelAmguri
Chanak20
21

Sundari
SoraliB Western Range Bagori

D. Burapahar Range, Ghorakai

1
2
3
4

Harmoi
Bhaisamari
Murphuloni
Gerakai

20
21
22
23

Bandarkhal
Gotonga
Nalamukh
Kawaimari

9
10
11

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

Bahubeel
BorbeelBaghmari
Deopani
Ajarkathoni
DalongDusui
Kanchanjuri
Bherbheri
Borakata
Malani
Haidandi

24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

Tunikai
Amkathoni
Difaloomukh beatBornoloni
Kathpora
Chitalmari
Pachim Bimoli
Ruikhowa
BimoliRajapukhuri
Gendamari
Rowmari

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

17
18
19

Burapahar Beat
Bhalukajan
Mahabahu Floaing

36
37
38

Donga
Kantaghat
HQ camp1
2
3
4

PIL 66/2012

E. Northern Range, Biswanath
PanpurTewaripal
Bogoriani temp.
Lahorijan
Gaitapu
New Keteng temp.
Hhadong
Lohorani 2
Tigris loaing
Luit loaing
Biswanath camp

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

KohuwaSildubi
Balidubi temp.
Gomeri
KetengBhawani
Murkhowa
Kingisher loaing
Unicorn loaing
Hawk Float

5
6
7
8

BhokteMoriaholaSisubari
Bokakhat Beat

F. Bokakhat HQ Beat
Panbari
Modarjuri
Gabharu
Gongasiloni loaing

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 347 of 402

ABSTRACT OF THE ANTI POACHING CAMPS:
Range
Central Range

No of Camps
51

Western Range

38

Eastern Range

35

Burapahar Range

21

Northern Range

21

Bokakhat HQ Beat

8

TOTAL

174

Includes 9 Floaing Camps highlighted in Yellow in the Table

Total Exising Towers: 13 as menioned below:
ER
KR
WR
BR

Sohola, Debeswari No. 1 & 2 = 3Mihimukh, Kathopra, Dafalong, Borbeel, Karsing = 5
Donga, Sesoni, Bahubeel = 3
Difalu, Sagalibeel = 2

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 348 of 402

Opinion/ Response from the Stakeholders, Experts, NGOs and Individuals
Richard Emslie,
Scientific Officer,
AfRSG, IUCN

As one of the "Friends of Kaziranga" I was most interested toread your background paper on Kaziranga.It is such a special
place and I have been fortunate to visit it on threeoccasions.
I have gone through your document and added my comments.
You highlight a really serious issue of human settlement anddisturbance rapidly
encroaching onto the park boundaries that threaten to limit
or stop movement tohigher ground during floods. I really like the suggestion to
try to create such acorridor by buying up and rehabilitating the tea gardens.
That seems to be a really
good idea and one that needs to be acted upon soon before it
is too late. This
question ultimately will probably be of far greater
importance than whether or not
to dehorn.
I will look through the links you sent me, but for now I
wanted to send you somecomments and some background information.
I know that dehorning is one of the key issues the court islooking at. You may findthe study on dehorning of interest. Raoul du Toit inparticular has the most datafrom years of opportunistic dehorning of some animals in the
Zimbabwe lowveld. He
found that despite slight mortality risks on balance thedehorned rhinos survived alittle better than the horned ones and dehorning didn't stop
the rhino cows breeding
really well. Zimbabwe's experience is however that dehorningon its own will notwork. Poachers will still poach if there is inadequate
protection and they thinkthey can get away with it. However if there is also decent
protection then you haveeffectively sifted the cost benefit away from the poachers
disincentivising them as
they will get less horn and less money for taking the sameamount of risk.
See also Raoul and Natasha's short popular article (although
they were baffled why
the editor put in a picture of one of your GOH rhino !).
The AfRSG doesn’t have an official position on dehorning but
it is generally
accepted that under certain circumstances dehorning can be

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 349 of 402

part of an anti-poachingstrategy. If you say have a smaller private population in avulnerable location you
might seriously consider dehorning all your rhinos and thismay encourage potential
poachers to go elsewhere where they can get more kgs of horn
for their efforts/risk.
A bit like someone putting in a good house alarm security
system. It transfers the
problem somewhere else. Dehorning in NW Namibia certainly
appeared (fromintelligence reports) to put off potential rhino poachers at
the time of Namibia's
independence. However it is not really a cost effective orpractical option for verylarge populations.
From a translocation perspective rhinos here are often
routinely dehorned or atleast horn tipped before translocation and this is in the
IUCN Rhio Translocation
Guidelines. If you want me to send you a digital copy ofthese please ask.
Someone may bring up a controversial paper by Joel Berger
when he was in Namibia.
However it has been roundly criticised and was based on atiny sample size. In
discussing dehorning of GOH rhino and the furore about
Berger's paper, Raoul (inan e-mail to Christy Williams) wrote.. "I honestly thinkthat there is not muchpoint in digging into the controversy that arose overBerger’s work in Namibia
because there are some key points that override issues of his
tiny sample size andother data analysis problems that arose in his papers:
1.)
For black rhinos, the fuss raised by Berger was to
do with defence against
predators. But he never explained that a.) that the greatest
predator risk to blackrhino calves is when they were left hidden by their mothers
while the cows went towater, which in Namibia can take a while – what difference
does it make then if the
cow is dehorned or not? b.) a cow without horns can stilleasily thump predators
like hyenas to death with horn stubs – I have even seen adehorned rhino killanother rhino, c.) does a hyena (or even a lion) size up arhino’s horn size before
deciding to tackle its calf if she is there to defend it?
What learned behaviour or
evolutionary response could achieve that calibrated predator
response?
2.)Your Indian rhinos have small horns. They use
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 350 of 402

their tushes for fighting andpresumably also for defence. Very different situation to
African rhinos. What
predators are of concern, in any case? Tigers? Will a small
reduction in size ofhorns that are already quite small make any difference totigers?
So it is a different ballgame in India/Nepal and to my mind
the question ofdehorning relates more to 1.) the poacher response, and 2.)
the risk ofimmobilization in swamps, rather than anything else such as
the kind of noise that
Berger made.
I’ve enclosed a brief paper on dehorning black rhinos (noidea why the editor used
an Indian rhino to illustrate it!), but must stress that thisis a different context
to yours.
Not sure if this helps, but don’t get side-tracked byirrelevant issues when making
a decision on dehorning Asian rhinos!
Regards
Raoul"
From memory I think Joel Berger’s study was based on a tiny
sample size (3?). Even
then I seem to recall (but am not 100% certain) the late
Blythe Loutit telling me
there was some problem with Berger misidentifying a rhino
with the result that arhino calf he deemed to have died actually survived. I do
clearly remember, that at
the time Berger’s work, it was heavily criticised by many
experienced African rhinoconservationists who paid very little attention to it.
However it was used by others
who sought to oppose what they saw as “invasive” procedures.
Raoul has dehorned lots of rhinos in Zimbabwe and if thehorns were so valuable andessential to the rhinos (as suggested by Berger) then one
could expect the
reproductive performance and survival rates of dehorned
rhinos to be much worse thanhorned rhino and that has not been the case in the Lowveld.
As Raoul and Natasha
Anderson have shown, many dehorned rhinos in the Lowveld in
Zimbabwe have bred andsurvived very well. Black rhinos can use horns to break
branches, but clearly
dehorning has not been a major problem. See
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 351 of 402

http://scienceline.org/2013/12/caught-in-the-crosshairs/ andsee Raoul and Natasha
Anderson’s recent article.
http://www.rhinoresourcecenter.com/index.php?
s=1&act=pdfviewer&id=1366424627&folder=136
which contains a key summary table below showing the betteroverall survival rateof dehorned compared to horned rhino in Bubye 2007-12.
As for the impact dehorning would have had on rhinos inManas. Probably would depend
upon the level of protection afforded to the rhinos.
Zimbabwe experience shows thatwithout adequate law enforcement dehorned rhinos also getpoached. One option may be
to concentrate dehorning in a few hot areas. You could set up
an adaptive management
experiment and do it in some areas but not others and measure
what happened.
You also need to bear in mind that horn grows back so you
will need to prime
decision-makers of the need to dehorn periodically if you
want to continue using
dehorning as part of a deterrent to poachers in Manas. Also
GOH carries much lesshorn and there is only one horn. You need to leave quite a
bit behind when dehorning
to avoid damaging the germinal layer and so dehorning wouldin percentage terms not
reduce the amount of horn (in % terms) that dehorning in
Africa reduces.
As for the impact dehorning would have had on rhinos inManas. Probably would depend
upon the level of protection afforded to the rhinos.
Zimbabwe experience shows thatwithout adequate law enforcement dehorned rhinos also getpoached. I don't know thedetails of Manas but it may be something else such as changeof leadership at the
top that may make much more of a difference.
You also need to bear in mind that horn grows back so you
will need to prime
decision-makers of the need to dehorn periodically if you
want to continue using
dehorning as part of a deterrent to poachers in Manas. You
always have to leave a
bit of horn behind to make sure you don't cut into thegerminal layer. If you do
this the horn is likely to never grow back properly and may
cause discomfort to therhino. However if done properly by skilled and experienced
rhino vets this is not adamaging procedure to the rhinos.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 352 of 402

Ultimately what matters is does dehorning improve thesurvival chance of thedehorned rhinos as Raoul found was the case. If I was a rhino
I would rather be
darted every few years and have some of my horn cut off if it
reduced my chance ofbeing killed by a poacher. Similarly it is better to take
Polio vaccine than get
Polio.
Might also be worthwhile for you to come and discuss and seeother models for park
expansion. There are multiple ways to skin a cat and you
don't necessarily want toforeclose your options in order the achieve a goal of park
expansion. The AfRSG
Chair Mike Knight has been involved with a lot of park
expansion as a major part ofhis work for SANParks and it may be worth your while to chatto him about it andpossibly even come and have look .
Also I realise you have limits on what can and can't be donein your NP's but one
must weigh up the negatives and positives of using herbicides
that breakdown quickly
and don't have long residual effects but which may help you
deal with really bad
invasive aliens that can significantly and very negatively
impact on rhino habitat.
Finally - poisoning horn. Apart from the moral aspects - ithas been sold astreatment in S.Africa. It has not been cheap and as can beseen from Sam Ferreira etal's Pachyderm paper this treatment didn't work as the dye
couldn't penetrate into
the horn. Seems that poisoning horns has been more of a money
making exercise by
those promoting it. Something to steer well clear of.
I like your paper's focus on improving the quality andtreatment and training ofyour field rangers. Just as in Africa I am sure a big part ofany solution will be
not to forget the basics and get them right.
I am currently en route to Omaha in the US where I am afraid
I will be in a
conference on the first (when I think you are having yourinternational session).
However on the first my conference registration only starts
at 3pm Omaha time and I
could be available before say 2.30pm. I have just looked it
up and the time in Omaha
is 10 hrs 30 mins behind the time in Guwahati. Thus I may beable to take part in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 353 of 402

discussions via video or Skype link given the time difference
if you wanted this.
Please let me know if this may be of interest. 4am in Omaha
will be 2.30pm your timein Guwahati.
Anyway hope the comments and documents help you in yourdeliberations. Please give ashout if there is something you would like to do before myconference starts and I
will see what I can do. I will be travelling for much of thenext day and be out ofcomms. However when I get to Omaha on the afternoon of the
30th I will try to lookat e-mail.
Best wishes
RichardRichard Emslie,
Scientific Officer,
AfRSG, IUCN

THIS IS A KEY ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED NOW BEFORE IT
IS TOO LATE. The function of the Park requires animals tohave the ability to migrate to higher ground during floods.
This is done in Parks like Kruger NP and I think HluhluweiMfolozi have also done this. Once vehicle carrying capacity
has been reached you have to wait for a vehicle to come out
before another can go in. As for throwing of rubbish perhaps legislate for steeper penalties for throwing rubbish
in NP's
THIS IS KEY - Migration of animals out of the park to higher
ground during floods has been key. It is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
for functioning of the system that some corridors are secured
and maintained to ensure that migration is still possible.
Agree - Aliens are a costly problem and can significantly
affect habitats for rhino.
WHY? Everything is made of "chemicals". Need to put things
into perspective. What is better - good habitat lost toaliens or effective clearing and retreatment of aliens tosecure areas of good habitat. Why not consider changing yourrules to allow the use of biodegradable herbisides thatbreakdown quickly and don't have a long term residual effect?
EXCELLENT PLAN as presumably this would help secure somecorridor routes into the higher areas during floods. Perhaps
there are opportunities for peripheral tourist developments
at the edge of such areas that can hopefully provide some
jobs for local communities.
Agree
Striking maps - EMPHASISES THE URGENCY OF SORTING OUTPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 354 of 402

CORRIDORS TO HIGHER GROUND ASAP BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE
NO it is not the largest - the White rhino (or possible GOH)
is the largest rhino. BR are quite a bit smaller than WR andGOH Rhino . There is not much to chose between GOH and Whites
in terms of size.
Granted - the Sumatran is the hairiest by far and hair can bevisible on its flanks but other rhinos can also have haireven at very sparse densities. BR and WR also have hair on
the tips of their ears
Not all are browsers. The white rhino is a grazer. The black
is a browser and GOH a mixed feeder eating browse and grass.
White rhino also do not only favour open areas as thebroadleaved, highly palatable and favoured Panicum maximum
and Panicum deustum grasses are found growing under tree
canopies.
3.5 years as an average is a little long and in Africa would
be indicative of a population probably above its maximum
productivity density. Under ideal conditions where densities
are below Ecological Carrying Capacity (ECC) both Black andWhite rhinos can have average intercalving intervals ofaround 2 to 2.5 years. No reason to think that GOH shouldhave any different demography. In Africa we would consider
ICI's of <2.5 years as good to excellent. 2.5-3 as good tomoderate, 3-3.5 moderate to poor and >3.5 as poor to very
poor. This may suggest that you have nothing to lose bytranslocating more rhino to found or boost GOH populations inother areas. Ultimately if you hardly remove any rhino thenif dispersal is prevented densities are likely to increase to
the point the productivity suffers.
20,424 is updated figure - round to 20,420
Updated figure 1,959 rounded to 1,960
updated to 2,323 or round to 2,320
5,08a is revised figure but round to 5,080
INCORRECT - The TRAFFIC document notes that there has been
one proper double blind clinical trial that was undertaken in
Taiwan. IN this study rhino horn was found to havestatistically significant fever reducing properties and wassuperior to buffalo horn which also reduced fever. While theplacebo control had no fever reducing effects, a cheaper
western medicine was the best fever reducer as it reduced
temperature by more than rhino horn, and did so for a longer
period. Thus rhino horn did appear to have fever reducing
powers in this case; albeit not as good as the cheaper
western medicine. I recall that in one other study, dosagesof horn that were higher than would ever be given did appear
to have some fever reducing effect. However I think anotherstudy didn't show any effect. However this issue is not justone of efficacy or not of specific treatments but perceptionsof the people taking the supposed treatment. In the same way
some people still buy homeopathic remedies in the west when
they may have been diluted so much that they may not contain
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 355 of 402

even a molecule of active ingredient ! Even
So far this year (as of 17 April) a total of 294 have beenpoached in SA. This translates to 2.75/day. While this ishigh and approaching levels that will not be sustainable thegood news is that this is very similar to the average numbersof rhinos poached/day in SA for the last three quarters of
2013. Thus poaching levels in S.Africa appear to havestabilised over the last year and the exponential increase
appears to have levelled off. Hopefully this is not just a
temporary respite before poaching exponentially increases
again.
Poaching fuelled by the demand - this currently has to besupplied by killing rhinos as there currently is no legal
international trade and there is a limit to the number ofexisting horns that can be stolen from museums etc.
Demand reduction efforts are likely to be a key part of any
solution.
Interestingly the new trade dynamic in Viet Nam appears tofavour horns from African rhino as these are larger andcurrently high prices are being paid/kg. Historically Asian
horns fetched much higher prices but today it may be more
profitable for criminals to poach African rhinos given thegreater amount of horn they get per rhino. One could
hypotheise that possibly this may be giving some protection
to Asian rhinos currently as the relative poaching rates ofAsian rhinos appear lower than in African countries being
affected by the big upsurge in rhino poaching.
However the other argument is that given the high prices
being paid/kg it still will be worthwhile for a poacher tokill a calf rhino in Africa or an Asian rhino. Thus any
advantage Asian rhinos may currently have will be limited.
Good protection will remain crucial. We have learned thesame with dehorned rhinos in Africa. Dehorning alone is nota solution. If it is going to be applied it has to be as partof an integrated strategy that includes effective law
enforcement.
Bit of an overstatement. Yes we have a serious problem and if
we don't get on top of it rhinos do face an uncertain future.
Agree with first sentence but not with second - Poaching in
Kaziranga NP is only marginally higher/km2 than Kruger NP.
Really both rates are pretty much the same. The number ofrhinos poached/km2/year in Kaziranga in 2013 (27 in
858.98km2) was 0.0314 compared to 606 in Kruger's 19,633 km2
in 2013 which came to a very similar 0.0.309. Both round to
0.31.
Good to see field rangers getting better equipped.
Very important to have good intelligence and good analysis(including social network analysis) to identify key players
in trade. Also important to use connectivity metrics to workout who to focus on to maximally disrupt networks. Also
important to expand intelligence outside the field and to put
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 356 of 402

greater emphasis on levels 3-5 in criminal pyramid rather
than just focusing on levels 1 and 2 at ground level. It has
been suggested that efforts should also focus on using
international anti-money laundering provisions to seize
assests from syndicates and to cut their funding whilst
hopefully also generating some revenue to help fund enhanced
field efforts.
South Africa's CSIR (Council for Scientific and Industrial
Research) undertook comparitive tests under field conditionsof about 50 UAV's. However these are not a substitute forgetting the basics of field law enforcement right. Need to becareful not to just buy the first toy demonstrated. I suggest
you get in touch with CSIR guys to learn about what
technology appears useful and what not. If you want to let meknow and I can give you contact information.
Although more clearly needs to be done to address the problem
of closing corridors and access to higher land outside of thepark. This will be necessary to ensure the ecological
functioning of the area.
Again only as good as your ability to react when your UAV
detects something.
One thing I don't see emphasised is the importance of getting
the right calibre of field ranger with good bush skills. One
problem in some areas of Africa has been an inadequate
selection process where selection has not been physicallydemanding enough with too much emphasis on paper skills.
However I have just noticed that later on you do emphaise theimportance of well training and well motivated staff. Agree.
Tony Conway did an analysis of a number of KwaZulu-Natal
Rhino Parks - some of which had experienced a bit or a lot ofpoaching and others had experienced very little or none. He
found that IUCN's measure of conservation effectiveness was
not a good predictor of poaching. However if I recall
correctly three things were related to rhino poaching. Not
surprisingly Park leadership was critical as it is often saida fish rots from the head down. Where there was poor patrol
coverage and standard operating procedures were not being
properly followed you had a poor park head. In addition
field ranger density had an influence withj good parks having
at least 1 man/10km2. (This may seem very low compared to
Kaziranga but the men are better paid and equipped).
doesn't have to be …
or a contractual National Park where some of the land remains
privately or community owned but the park it now forms partof sets the ground rules as to what can and can't happen in
the area?
Not sure I totally agree here. It could sustain a significant
biomass of wildlife in the long run because you have regular
inputs of lots of nutrients following floods. However if
Kaziranga becomes an island due to settlement expansion and
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 357 of 402

increased disturbance I do agree that the natural process ofdispersal will then be threatened and one would need toroutinly translocate rhinos out to new areas to keep the
population productive (as for example has been the case with
Hluhluwe-iMfolozi). It might sustain wildlife but at the riskof much poorer breeding performance and perhaps some negative
habitat changes caused by artifically high levels of
grazing/browsing. The potential stopping of migration out tohigh ground at times of floods is very worrying and the
proposals to buy up tea gardens and consolidate them into thepark is to be welcomed. Essential to ensure corridors andaccess to higher ground is maintained before it is too late.
You don't want what happened to Nairobi National Park
happening. There corridors gradually were allowed to closesignificantly affecting historical migratory species such as
Wildebeest that used to migrate in and out of the park in
numbers. The more a reserve becomes an "island" the more youneed to actively manage including translocating surplus
animals out in order to simulate what used to be "naturalprocesses".
This is why in Africa most countries actively manage theirrhinos as a metapopulation.

BHASKAR J.
EMPOWERMENT OF LOCAL PEOPLE TO BE THE MAINBARUA,STAY OF TOURISM SERVICES IN KAZIRANGAManaging Director, SUMMARY
Luit Holidays
Kaziranga being a premier National Park in the world Wildlife Map is
Joint Secretary &also an UNESCO World Heritage site as well as a Tiger Reserve andSpokesperson,
an Important Bird Area. So it is no wonder that this place attracts
Tour Operators
tourists of different hues and shades, from diverse places, of diverse
Association ofinterest groups, of different expectation levels. It is also no surprise
Assam (TOAA)
therefore that Kaziranga is the pivot around which the entire tourism
Managing Agoratoli scenario in North East India revolves.
Resort
The recent spurt in Poaching activities at Kaziranga and the resultant

Member Local
negative publicity surrounding it can be attributed amongst many
Advisory Committee ofother things to rising unemployment amongst the local villages
Kaziranga Tiger
surrounding the park - specially the lower strata of the society like
Reserve

the Tea Gardens and the Tribal Villages, the sense of disconnect of
the local population with the management of the park and the lack ofconfidence amongst them to be a part of the Tourism Bandwagon.
One need not reiterate on the potential Tourism has in empowering
the local population towards direct and indirect employment.
The empowerment and employability quotient can take various forms– from basic skills like Front Office Jobs, Food & Beverage,
Housekeeping, Driving, Gardening, Cooking, to Medium Level Skills
like Guides and Naturalists to High Level skills like Interpreters andProficiency in Foreign Language such as French, German, Chinese,
etc. to Top End Skills like Birding and Wildlife Photography.
Moreover Kaziranga being primarily a Wildlife destination, every
individual related directly or indirectly in tourism activities (right fromPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 358 of 402

the driver to the waiters to the sales person in the market, etc)
should have a basic knowledge of the wildlife scene here and shouldbe able to communicate the same to the visitors at least in proper
English.
TOURISM AND CONSERVATION
It needs no re-iteration that tourism and conservation are opposite
sides of the same coin. Given the huge potential available atKaziranga, tourism by itself can be the main lever for ushering insocio-economic development of the area. The emphasis should be on
every household of the area being benefitted directly or indirectlyfrom tourism activities here. The immediate need of the hour is to first
empower the marginalized section of the society here towards theservice component of tourism – before venturing into bigger andcapital intensive activities. This will go a long way in minimizing theimmediate menace of poaching activities, if not altogether.
ANALYSIS OF THE SERVICE TRENDS PREVAILING AT
KAZIRANGA• Local youths presently employed at the various resorts andguest houses are mostly in the entry level – receptionists,
waiters, housekeeping, dish washing, etc.
• A majority of these local youths are in the Class X / ( +)educational ability and come from the strata of society where
their income is an augmentation of the already steady income
source in the family – either through cultivation, small businessor Government Jobs.
• The ability of these youths to climb up the management ladderis stemmed due to inadequacy of training and lack ofcommunication, networking, entrepreneurial and leadershipskills.
• This has given rise to a sense of being neglected – leading todiscontent amongst them, when they see mid level
management staff is being brought from outside the local area,
and they are stuck with a monotonous and menial job for amajor part of their prime.
• The benefits of tourism has yet to percolate down to the strata
of society whose income levels are just above the poverty line,
viz. Tea Garden Community and the Tribal Communities livingin the fringe areas. Lack of education, awareness and training
amongst the youths of these communities has ensured thatthey have been bypassed from the benefits accruing out of
tourism activities in Kaziranga.
NEED OF THE HOUR
• Empower the unemployed local Tea Garden and Tribal youths
and other communities in Service, hospitality, Housekeeping,
Guiding, English Communication Skills, Leadership &Entrepreneurial skills, so that they can enter the Sector by
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 359 of 402

being employable and then onwards to be service providers
themselves to partake of the tourism potential available here.
Note: The beneficiaries of this program at a later stage after
practical experience can be trained further to enjoy thebenefits of the various Productive Schemes of the Government- such as being Home Stay providers, for instance.
AIM OF THE PROJECT
The aim of this project is to improve the economic stability of the poorfamilies living within the fringe areas of Kaziranga National Park as
well as instill a level of confidence and awareness amongst the local
Educated Youths to be self reliant. The project is to start up a tourism
services initiative together with the local poor families within the reachof tourists’ attraction areas in Kaziranga. Tourism industry requiring
heavy capital investment is locking out most of the local people withinthese areas. Mostly affected are the poor families who are missing
job and income generation opportunities since they are not involvedin the exploitation of their available natural resources, throughtourists’ accommodation, tour guiding and networking for socioeconomic development. The Government of Assam through the
Department of Tourism has already announced The Assam Rural
Home Stay Tourism Scheme-2012. But for the scheme to be a
success, the rural people first needs to be empowered to handle thedemands of the tourists – right from cleanliness, sanitation, service,
housekeeping, guiding, etc. not to speak about the ability tocommunicate in English – to understand and comprehend the needsof the tourists. The ,main focus of this training project is not just to
make one employable but to mentor and hand held them to be self
employers and employment avenue creators.
For instance, for these home stays to be affordable withoutcompromising on the services, the foremost requirement will be toempower the owners to understand all facets of tourism services –beginning from networking to preparation of itinerary, activities,
reception, service, housekeeping, guiding, communication skills,
etiquette, etc. so that they do not have to depend upon paid / salaried
employees. The training will focus in guiding the youths to create
better understanding amongst the visitors of local customs, theirimportance and continued relevance in the ever changing world.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of this project is to improve the economic stability of thepoor families living within the reach of tourists’ attraction areas in
Kaziranga.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES• To newly empower 200 poor unemployed youths from the Tea
garden, Tribal and other communities to partake theopportunities provided by tourism at Kaziranga – to make them
employable / self employed and subsequently provide an
opportunity for internship / volunteering and further skills
development before they are capable of venturing on their
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 360 of 402

•

•
•

own.
To upgrade the soft skill set levels of 200 educated youths by
imparting training in Personality Development, English
Communication Skills, Personal Grooming, Etiquette andLeadership and Entrepreneurial Skills to enable them to be
employed at the Mid Management Strata / capable to venture
on their own for in home stay based tourism activities in
Kaziranga for economic stability, poverty reduction andemployment generation.
To involve 100 youths in Wildlife Guiding Activities with better
communication skills in English.
To help create / mentor an affordable, reliable, effective andsecure infrastructure for low income tourists visiting Kaziranga.

JUSTIFICATION / BACKGROUND
Kaziranga is a major international tourist destination receiving about
five million visitors / year. Being an expensive tourist’s destination
most of the visitors are of high income levels. Most of these visitors
prefer staying in expensive hotels and use expensive transportationmeans to visit the areas. This is only benefiting the huge investors intourism industry leaving out the locals bordering the visited areas.
Over 99% of the local communities living within tourists attraction
areas in Kaziranga are not involved in tourism activities for socioeconomic development. Due to this, conflicts between the locals andgovernment policy implementers on conservation is constantly
experienced leading to less conducive environments for visitors.
This proposed pilot project is therefore to involve the local families in
tourism industry for economic stability and bring about theconservation of the environment and natural resources for posterity.
This will also help reduce the cost of visiting Kaziranga for low
income visitors.
BENEFICIARIES• 200 poor family members living within tourists’ attraction sites in
Kaziranga to be employed / self employed.
• 200 employed / self employed youths to further develop theirskills so as to enable them to jump to a better social stratum.
• 100 unemployed Wildlife Guides
Ref.:

As discussion in the Internaional Conference held at NEDFI
Conference Hall, Dispur by our representaive on 20.05.2014, with
the Amicus curie Mr. P. N. Choudhury of Honourable GuwahaiHigh Court.

Dear Sir,

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 361 of 402

We, the members of Greater Kaziranga Human Resource andEnvironment Protecion Commitee, would like to put forward thefollowing suggesions, for development safety and security of Kaziranga
Naional Park as well as the protecion of world famous One Horned
Rhinoceros, for doing the needful please. That Sir,
(1)

The development of paricular place or society mainly depends on
many factors. One of such main factors is the Communicaion
aspect. As there are no Air, Water or Railway communicaion to
Kaziranga, the tourists (both domesic and foreigner) and the local
people are solely dependent on the Road Communicaion. In
Kaziranga the N.H. 37 is passing through the southern boundary of
the Kaziranga Naional Park from Jakhalabondha to Bokakhat, andthis road is the only means of communicaion connecion upper
Assam and Lower Assam. Hence this N.H. 37 is pracically termed asthe ‘Life Line’ of Assam and the Assamese people. Moreover almost
6.50 lakh inhabitants are dewelling in both the sides of N.H. 37,
including many revenue villages in and around the fringe area of
Kaziranga Naional Park from Koliabor to Numaligarh. We feelproud to menion here that these inhabitants are the lovers of wild
animals of Kaziranga Naional Park and they act like the honorary
guards for the protecion of these animals, paricularly the one
horned rhinoceros.

2.(a)When we think for the overall development of Kaziranga Naional
Park we can not avoid or ignore the aspect of development of thesevillagers, local people, local socioeconomic condiions of the region
as a whole, and instead accuring the good services and dedicaionof some local youths for the beneit of the park.
But it is seen that, during construcion of East-West corridor
connecion Assam with the rest of the country - some NGOs in thename of animal lovers, who are using Kaziranga and its habitates as
their source of earning livelihood - ignoring the human aspect andits development had pressurized the Govt. as well as the Naional
Highway Authority of India to drop the construcion of the stretchof N.H. 37 from Koliabor to Numaligarh on the false plea that it is

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 362 of 402

passing through the Kaziranga Naional Park.
Local people were agitaing on this false issue as the N.H. 37 in thisstretch have passed through outside the Park of its Southernboundary, touching only 6 or 7 places of its new addiions. But theauthoriies having not expert opinion of their own, and solely
dependent on these NGOs, did not hesitate to ignore the humanaspect.
(a)Sir, instead of trying to establish a hypotheical fact that N.H. 37
from Koliabor to Numaligarh is the root of all evils - let us try toestablish the real fact that - this stretch may be converted to adeveloped 4 lane road by using modern technology in a scieniic
way - which will carry civilizaion to this World Heritage Site,
dedicaing to both animal and human being. At present build up
safe passages as short term measures, Fly overs where necessary.

(b)

Taking in to conidence the villagers of fringe villages, local people try to engage the local Human Resource for the protecion
developmental and proper conservaion works of Kaziranga
Naional Park. Also give emphasis for their all round development.
In this connecion we would like to draw your atenion to the fact
that, now a days Karbi Anglong area is not safe for animals like
Rhinoceros, deers etc. as present incidents of rhinopoaching in
Kaziranga Naional Park reveals the involvement of the militantgroups. Moreover the Forest oicials from Karbi Anglong present at
the conference expressed their inability to give protecion to thestray rhinos crossing over to the side of Karbi Anglong area.
Hence our suggesion, we should create suicient highland withplantaion of suitable jungle for rhino. These high land areas shouldbe created in the available and suitable selected 10-12 places eachmeasuring one square km or so. While construcing such high lands
various water bodies will automaically be created for the use ofanimals during hot summer.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 363 of 402

As the Kaziranga Naional Park is heavily a lood prone area due tothe mighty Brahmaputra rivers, it is closely associated withEROSION of the park area. We have already lost our years long
heritage with the loss of Arimora which has been eroded. Oursuggesion in this regard is : (d) Convince the Central Govt. toconsider this natural calamity as the naional problem which is aserious threat to the World Heritage Site - Kaziranga Naional Park.
The Central Govt. to use modern technology to curb the aggressionof lood and to regain the lost area for the use of the animals.
(e)

The small island of char area in Brahmaputra and the foot hills of
Burhapahar area are day by day grabbing by new unknown faces.
We suspect these people invite and give shelter to poachers. Pleasearrange to deploy more trained security personal equipped withmodern arms and weapons to face the poachers bravely.

(f)

Further while enforcing any new law abiding in the Kaziranga
Naional Park area, relaing to the wild life, we invite public hearing
and paricipaion of local people to maintain congenial atmospherein future.

Hope our suggesions will receive due importance and you will act
accordingly, which we believe, will help to bridge a congenial atmosphereto build up safety and security to one horned rhinoceros, as well.
With sincere regards,
Truly yours.
Munindra Nath Sarmah (President)
Pradip Bora
(Gen. Secy)Deba

Ron Chandler
President
Conservation Initiative
for the Asian Elephant,Inc.
352.215.8400

Dear Mr. Yadava,
I trust this letter finds you in the best of health and spirits.
Conservation Initiative for the Asian Elephant (CIFAE) is a US based
non-profit that has supported projects in Assam before, most notably
the recent project titled “A Forest Department-Community to improve
CIFAEinc@gmail.c the protection of western Hoolock gibbons in Jeypore RF, Upper
Assam” that was co-funded by USFWS.
om
http://Conservation
InitiativefortheAsia I have had the honor of visiting your magnificent Kaziranga NP and
nElephant.Bellstrik working with local officials and NGOs in the area to assist them in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 364 of 402

e.comefforts to preserve wildlife as well as help develop sustainable local
economies. In response to your recent appeal, please find following
our recommendations on how to improve protection andmanagement of Kaziranga NP. I hope that you find thesesuggestions useful in your deliberations during meetings in April andMay 2014, and hope that you will not hesitate to contact me if there
is anything that CIFAE can do to assist you.
While we fully recognize that Kaziranga NP is one of the bestprotected parks in India, and while we also realize that Kaziranga’s
magnificence is a testament to the sacrifices made by the officers
and field staff posted there, we offer the following recommendations.
1.
We believe that there is a need to recruit younger forest guards
so they can be mentored by the experienced older guards and gamewatchers. This will help to ensure that Kaziranga NP continues its
fine tradition of dedicated field staff when retirement or illness
occurs.
It is essential that youthful guards are recruited fromneighbouring communities of the Park to ensure that they
have a stake in seeing wildlife thrive in Kaziranga NP.
2.
Field staff in Kaziranga NP make great sacrifices leaving theirfamilies to fend for themselves for months on end.
To support their heroic efforts and thus build and maintain morale werecommend that they and their families receive better access tohealthcare and education. To accomplish this we recommend that
officers and staff receive increased healthcare benefits, additionaldays of leave to attend to emergencies, and for special scholarships
to support their children’s education.
As you know, when the basic needs of field staff are provided theirmorale improves and consequently their efforts to protect Kaziranga
NP.
3.
Land surrounding the boundaries of Kaziranga NP is often
used by wildlife especially during the floods. This land is subject
seemingly unrestricted land use planning resulting haphazard
construction of resorts, shops, and industries that destroy
opportunities for multi-purpose planning that allows for wildlife aswell as economic development.
We recommend establishment of Kaziranga Development Authority,
a governing body that would be responsible for ensuring thatdevelopment, if allowed, does not block wildlife movement. In
addition, the Kaziranga Development Authority would be responsible
for ensuring that land use changes by local people for their own
livelihoods would be permitted in such a way as to protect wildlife
movement or that they received appropriate compensated should
their land be part of a critical wildlife movement corridor or highland
escape during floods.
The Kaziranga Development Authority would also have the authority
to accept or reject projects in the Karbi Anglong that might affect the

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 365 of 402

wildlife of Kaziranga NP. A similar development authority alreadyexists in a few places in India and abroad and these could be used
as a template to develop the Kaziranga Development Authority.
4.
Related to Recommendation 3 (above) is the essential
acquisition of critical pieces of privately owned land that are within
known wildlife corridors or that are used as refuges during floods toensure that these lands remain available to wildlife for prosperity.
Moreover, acquisition and protection of land surrounding Kaziranga
NP is of critical importance for buffering against future catastrophic
effects of dam building Tibet and climate change river flood regimes.
Protecting land around Kaziranga NP would also provide humanrefuge in times of flooding and other disasters caused by climatechange and thoughtless water manipulation outside India’s borders.
Generous financial and resettlement packages should be offered tothose asked to give up their lands to keep Kaziranga NP healthy andits wildlife safe. Finally, to ensure that wildlife have access to Karbi
Anglong Hills for perpetuity, we believe that infrastructure currently
blocking or restricting wildlife corridors between Kaziranga NP and
Karbi Anglong Hills should be demolished, and the stakeholders
affected be adequately compensated.
5.
We are aware that very few of rhino poaching cases haveresulted in arrests and convictions. Therefore it is necessary toestablish a dedicated mobile forensic in Kaziranga NP. This unit
would need to be staffed with experts in scene-of-crime investigationand forensic detectives who can then build solid evidence-based
cases through the use of cutting edge technology such as genetic
fingerprinting from rhino and poacher tissue samples taken at crime
scenes. Such evidence would lead to apprehension and conviction of
perpetrators under the Indian Wildlife Act which if applied is quite
severe.
Finally, it is essential that funds allocated to Kaziranga NP from theState Government as well as from NTCA and Project Elephant andother centrally sponsored schemes reach the park in a timely
manner so that these funds can be used to ensure effective
protection of Kaziranga’s wildlife.
Our commitment to assist Kaziranga NP authorities in any way
possible is sincere and steadfast. We hope that you will call upon us
for assistance.
Thanking you for the opportunity to provide suggestions toward
effective long-lasting improvements for anti-poaching efforts andmanagement in Kaziranga NP and Karbi Anglong region.
With sincere thanks,
Ravi Changty

The following points can be considered :1. Page 3: We need more Highways: A map / graphicalPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 366 of 402

representation of the alternative highways to be developed
can be provided, as it will easier for the readers tounderstand.
2. ATV s for the rangers for patrolling.
3. K-9 team to be developed.
4. Invisible Fencing.
5. VTS for all the jeep safaries tagged with RFID with geofencing
Dr. Bibhab Kumar
Talukdar,Chair of IUCN/SSC
Asian Rhino
Specialist Group
Secretary General
cum CEO of
Aaranyak,Asia Coordinator ofInternational Rhino
Foundation

RHINO PIL AND MEASURES NEEDED TO CHECK FURTHERRHINO POACHING IN KAZIRANGA, ASSAM
Suggestions from :Dr. Bibhab Kumar Talukdar,
Chair of IUCN/SSC; Asian Rhino Specialist Group
Secretary General cum CEO of Aaranyak
Asia Coordinator of International Rhino Foundation

•

•

•

•

PIL 66/2012

Director KNP may have received many suggestions frommany people/agencies. It is time to prioritize based on theneeds and wants to move forward realising that fund could bea limiting factor to what we need and what we want. So
priority should be to find out the needs at this stage rather
than wants.
Let’s focus on what could prevent further poaching of rhinos? I
feel intelligence gathering on movement of poachers, theneffecting action on such intelligence to prevent poaching
preferably when poachers are still outside the park and ifarrests are made, ensure conviction by putting a dedicatedteam of forest officials to pursue the cases from A-Z.
Without conviction, I feel, we can’t show supremacy overpoachers. Arrest is just the first steps, but if arrested persons
are not convicted they become hardcore poachers and will
create some more poachers. For this I feel funds are
required and has to be top priority agenda to checkpoaching.
Welfare of frontline and all forest staffs working in rhino
bearing areas must be ensured with proper support that
includes field gears, good health and physical and mental
training at regular intervals. Whatever machines/tools we use
to prevent poaching, it will be these ground forest staffs thatneed to be fit first to use the machine and tools. Sending
young forest staffs for combating training in batches
should be the priority.
To find out the key sponsors or abettors involved in rhino
poaching, KNP authorities should immediately collectinformation from Golaghat and Kaliabor and Biswanath Court

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 367 of 402

••with regards to - which are persons taking bail for thearrested poachers need to be identified and startinvestigation from there. This will give a clear picture on men
behind poachers. I suggest each ACF of Kaziranga NP may
be given responsibility to pursue rhino poaching related cases
in Golaghat, Kaliabor (Now perhaps Nagaon court) andBiswanath (now may be Tezpur) Court to ensure speedy
conviction. These ACFs may be assisted by new range
officers who may be attached to the ACF for exclusively
dealing with court cases and anti-poaching operations.
Incentives both financial and professional should be given to
the team for successful conviction of rhino poachers.
All efforts must be made to garner increasing support towards
rhino conservation from fringe villagers of Kaziranga NP. The
differences between fringe villagers and forest department
need to be sorted out by establishing a committee which will
try to strengthen the bridge between the local communities
and Kaziranga National Park authorities. This effort will help isbuilding and strengthening second line of defence to protect
rhinos.
Before purchasing sophisticated equipment for surveillance ofthe rhino bearing areas, its efficacy in field condition may betested and the countries in Africa who used such technology
may be contacted for their review. Not all surveillance
equipments work everywhere.

Dipankar Ghose,

Dear Sir,This has reference to your email on the subject matter, dated 21st May
2014, written to our Secretary General and CEO. We have gone throughthe presentation sent by you and have also looked at that in the light of
the report on wildlife connectivity that our colleagues submitted to
110 003 I India
Telefax: ++ 91 11 4150 4782 your office some weeks back. Following are some of the points that we
I dghose@wwindia.net I
would request you to include in the final report that you would be
www.wwindia.org
submitting in this regard.
Ph.D. I Director - Species &Landscapes Programme I
WWF-India Secretariat
172 B Lodi Estate I Max
Mueller Marg I New Delhi

Securing Corridors around Kaziranga
The presentation shared by the Field Director, Kaziranga National Park
(henceforth KNP) points out different land uses that are hampering
animal movement through the corridors and several solutions havebeen mentioned. We could also stress that each stakeholder group(hotel and resort owners, dhaba owners, habitation/ settlement i.e.
different communities in those, tea estates, quarry operator and stateagencies) will have to be addressed separately and differently toaddress the issue of corridor fragmentation. The said presentation also
points out that while connectivity across the landscape is a concern,
there are priority areas that need to be secured, some because those arestill not highly disturbed and others because they are important but
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 368 of 402

greatly threatened due to various activities.
Existing corridors should be appropriately identified after consultingwith stakeholders and NGOs who have been working on corridors andthen demarcated. Subsequently the corridors need to be secured by thegovernment.
Fragmentation of Amguri corridor has been mentioned in thepresentation shared by the Field Director, KNP. Measures for securing
this corridor and others need to be included in the Tiger Conservation
Plan (TCP) for Kaziranga. For Maloni - Burapahar corridor, details on
the area and an economic analysis of whether it is feasible to purchasethat land are required. What measures is the govt. taking for restoring
Kanchanjhuri corridor, needs to be detailed. How much area of the
Hatikhuli TE needs to be purchased and what is the amount required
for that, has to be mentioned in the TCP.
Mission: Poaching-free Kaziranga
WWF-India is willing to assist the Assam state Forest Department toaddress the issue of lack of motivation and training for frontline staff.
WWF-India and Assam Forest Dept. already has an agreement for
constituting the annual Assam Vanya Prani Mitra Award for staff with
exemplary contribution in wildlife conservation within the state. Extraordinary performance of select staff of Kaziranga needs to behighlighted and those staff need to be nominated for the said award.
The presentation mentioned that the anti-poaching camps are not in agood shape, there has to be a strategy for the government to improve
the situation.
1.
The northern boundary of the Park needs increased surveillanceand protection to be provided to multiple entry points through the riverisland/ sand bars (Chapori) all along the Brahmaputra river course
adjoining the Park.
a.
Support of River Police may be sought.
b.
Imposition of prohibitory orders on movement of vessels during
dusk-to-dawn may be considered. Fishing in these stretches during day
for livelihood of bonafide local people might be allowed.
2.
Bagser Reserve Forest to the south of the park (adjoining
Burapahar Range) is a known conduit for poachers striking Burapahar.
The said area has to be secured to reduce this threat.
a.
Bagser Reserve Forest may be added to the Park to bring it under
the same management for increased patrolling and subsequently
securing the area.
b.
The hilly areas of Bagser Reserve Forest would serve as a natural‘highland’ for animals during floods, and with a higher degree ofprotection this area will help in reducing flood vulnerability for thelarge mammals of Kaziranga.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 369 of 402

3.
Effective coordination with Police Department is likely to help in
curbing wildlife crime as the legal follow-up of most of the poaching
related cases are followed up by police. Coordination with the Forensics
laboratories is also important to get reports on time to be able to chargearrested persons within the legal timeframe.
4.
Inter-state coordination, especially with Nagaland and Manipur,
may prove to be helpful in blocking wildlife trade routes and arresting
kingpins who control the trade within Indian boundary.
5.
A separate legal cell needs to be set up within the Forest Dept. todeal with all legal matters related to poaching and other wildlife crimeas this requires dedicated human resource.
6.
Monitoring of patrolling efforts needs to be carried out using LEM
tools.
7.
Traditional foot patrols and elephant patrols are to be judiciously
used.
Landscape Level Conservation
Proper land cover zonation needs to be prepared and master plandeveloped. After that an autonomous body needs to be formed tomonitor and implement the master plan through a special Act.
Balancing Development and Conservation
A cell dedicated to maintaining community liaison is suggested to build
strong park-people relationship. The cell should be entrusted withactivities related to Eco-Development Committee or similar suchinitiatives to reach out to the fringe villages and build relations.
National Highway 37
Overpass/ underpass, as suitable, should be constructed at identified
critical corridor stretches that will render the National Highway
functional with regulated vehicle movement. An alternate road to thepresent National Highway should also be developed keeping in mind
increased traffic in future.
Please get back to us for any clarification.
Thank you and best regards
Bhaskar Choudhury

Concept note: Role of veterinary professionals in conservation
Reg Head (Assam) of Greater one horned rhinoceros in Assam with particularand Head Vet NE reference to Kaziranga National Park
Wildlife Trust of
India
There are three clear roles to my opinion, being a veterinarianTel: 919435748840
myself and also having a working experience of 14 years inwildlife health, management and rehabilitation in Assam.
Looking at the population dynamics of the species and the threats
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 370 of 402

it is facing and going to face in near future, I have categorised
the role of a veterinary professional into five major areas to see
the species in a better shape tomorrow,
I have also put across the planning of resources that are available
to the Forest department for accomplishment of the roles(table1).
1. Fundamental studies on basic biology of rhinoceros (ageestimation, normal physiology)
2. Population management (local overabundances) throughtranslocation:
3. Health and welfare needs of individual animals in distress
4. Epidemiological investigation of susceptible diseases and its
prevention
5. A veterinarian can bridge the gap of community with the forest
department by providing technical support of livestock
husbandry to fringe villagers.
Resources available as of now:
1. Forest Veterinary Officer,
2. Centre for Wildlife rehabilitation and Conservation (CWRC)
has at least five full time veterinarians who are serving thedepartment but can be utilised better.
3. Department of animal husbandry and veterinary, Bokakhat.
4. Professor of veterinary college, Guwahati on call.
Questions, resources and feasibility:

PIL 66/2012

Area of work

Action points

Feasibility

Resources(manpower)

Answer to fundamental
biological questions(age/physiology)

Biometric study of available
skull with forest department
for age estimation, collectionof data and samples during
Post mortem examination

Very high

FVO, CWRC
veterinarians in
consultation with
Veterinary College,
Guwahati

Population management
through translocation
Health and welfare
needs of individuals in
distress
Study disease
epidemiology

Already undergoing throughIRV 2020
CWRC has been handling thissuccessfully in collaboration
with the department
Formulating epidemiologicalmodel, collection and storageof biological samples

High

IRV 2020 team

Very high

CWRC and trained forest
staff

High

CWRC, veterinary
college

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 371 of 402

Bridging the gap

Organize farmers meetwithin KNP fringe villagers
at least once every quarter

Very high

AH andVeterinary
Department,
Bokakhat.
Krishi Vigyan
Kendra,CWRC

The above mentioned action points will give us not only
comprehensive information on the species, but also link it to
the community without involvement of major financial
resources.
Regards
Valmik Thapar

I believe that to strengthen management and protection in wildlife
rich landscapes requires innovative policy adaptations. In India anenormous talent lives outside the realm of the government systemand the officer. This talent has to be harnessed for wildlife. We haveexamples of how Nandan Nilekani and Sam Pitroda were given
Cabinet rank and put in control of government offices to complete a
mission. We have examples of how more then 100 ambassadors
have been appointed to missions abroad even though they were
never a part of the Indian Foreign Service. Even in the IAS dozens ofsenior officers including Secretary rank are employed each year on
short and long term contracts.
The time has come to fo the same in our national parks and tiger
reserves. Government rules permit such inductions in cadre..noncadre and consultancy posts. In places like Kaziranga the Field
Director needs to engage on short term and long term contracts atleast 20 personnel who are experts in wildlife science..anti
poaching..tourism..people welfare..botany..water conservation..etc
etc. All these persons are given the status of CF..DFO..ACF..andbecome a part of the Field Directors team that manages and protects
the park. Each one will have an office and forest staff will beanswerable to them. This will create great strength in the team andsuch a joint approach will overcome many problems. Suchhinnovative strategies can only be welcomed and the Rules ofGovrrnment allow for this. It is much better then Dehorning Rhinos.
VALMIK THAPAR
9.5.2014

SUGGESTIONS / CONTRIBUTIONSBHASKAR J.
(j). Promote Kaziranga as a Birding Destination. This will help in
BARUA,
bringing in more discerning and responsible tourists. This will
Managing Director,
also encourage visitors to make repeated visits.
Luit Holidays
Joint Secretary &Spokesperson,
In this regard, I along with Dr. Kamini Barua of the
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 372 of 402

Tour Operators
Association of
Assam (TOAA)Managing Agoratoli
ResortMember Local
Advisory
Committee of
Kaziranga Tiger
Reserve

Department of Ecology, University of Leuphama, Luneberg,
Germany presented a paper on the prospects of Birding
Tourism at Darwin in Australia during the celebration of the
Wildlife Week, 2013 organised by Wldlife Tourism, Australia.
(k).The carrying capacity of the park may be notified and steps
taken to ensure the no. of visits permissible during a day.
These fixed no. of visits should spread across all the four
ranges and should be strictly on a first come first basis. For
this to be implemented effectively and transparently, theofficial website of KNP should have provisions for pre / online
booking of safaris.
(l). The entry fees should be increased for Indians and decreased
for foreigners to be brought at par – say for instance Rs.
200.00 per person. This will go a long way in increasing therevenues as well as discourage casual visitors who visit thepark just for fun.
(m).
The department should initiate steps in association withprivate partners for training local youths as Wildlife / Birding
Guides with proper communication skills. Apart from the usual
benefits accruing to the local community, this will also go along way in inculcating amongst the family members of theseyouths not to indulge in anti-conservation activities as well as
ensure the enrichment of the experience of the visitors.
(n).
Ban the use and carriage of any plastic items inside the
park.
(o).
Immediately take steps in association with the fringearea people to stop cattle grazing inside the park.
Unhindered cattle grazing and even movement of domestic
animals like Stray Dogs have come to such a pass that weare facing at a disaster which is of a magnitude much higher
than poaching.

Kamal Gogoi

Date: 24-05-2014

AASHRAY
LODGE
Kaziranga
M.No:9435478339

Sir,
From reliable sources I have to know that views
regarding the conservation of Kaziranga National Park
have been asked by you and as a sensitive and well
wisher of this great world heritage site, I would like topresent some of my views on the aforesaid subject. The
recent activities of poachers and harmful effects of thesame has created a great deal of stir among the people.
The undersigned is a native of Lukhurakhania villages, ahistorical place of Kaziranga. As a native, I am well

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 373 of 402

connected with this park from birth, so I am well aware of
its present condition more than anyone else. I wasawarded by Governor of Assam in 1991 for my active rolein saving this would Heritage site, in different way and also
participated many times in its wildlife census work on therequest of concerned authorities. Following are thehindrances in the path of conservation of the Kaziranga
Wildlife from my point of view:
1.The gradual extension of tourism in Kaziranga, resultsin the population explosion in this area. For the Profit
motive only many businessmen from Assam and different
parts of the country rushing here and establishing theirluxuries hotels and other types of business. As a result alarge portion of area covering from Burahpahar hills to
Dhanshri River and Karbi Hills. (South of Difflo river) havebeen affected severely. The chief factors are illegal
residences, tea gardens, stone crushers Etc. and alongwith these the luxurious hotels. So the wildlife of thenational Park has been gradually shifting to eastern andwestern part from its core area. This shifting has benefitted
the Poachers of Kanchanjuri and Agaratali area where anumbers of rhinos have been killed. As wildlife do notunderstand the boundaries created by man.
During the year of 1987, while as a student close to thenational Park. I started my career as the first ever tourist
guide and jeep driver and later on I started an eco-tourist
lodge with three rooms in my home, to guide the local
people for their socio – economic development. The
villagers, inhabited close to the Park have constantly been
disturbed by the wildlife of the Park, destroying paddy
fields, killing domestic animal and villager’s life and assets
as well. So it was an important
step to introduce theconcept of eco-tourism only for the villagers living close to
the national Park. First, ever conscious organization
supported my concept, but as time passed the chief aim of
the concept was brutally crushed down. And businessmanfrom different place of Assam and other parts of India like
Guwahati, Jorhat, Dibrugarh, golaghat, Mumbai, Delhi,
Kolkata, came to establish the luxurious hotels and lodges.
These People are not the victims of the National park andthey have no any contribution to the Park. In that case why
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 374 of 402

should we permit them to establish their polluting businessin the Kaziranga National Park ?
We see that agricultural fields have been used forother purposes and hills areas have been cutting down toplain lands and these activities have severely affected thebio-diversity of the Kaziranga. The civil sub-division andDistrict Administrative authorities (civil) both alienated theForest Department and permitted these capitalist to exploit
and harm this bio-diversity of the national Park. Rapidly thetruth is that the safety and security of this world heritagesite solely depends on selfless endevourment of bothgovernment and non –governmental organization equality.
The native people
surrounded this national park havebeen constantly been victimize by the wildlife of this park
now and then but these outsiders are never beenhampered by the same. So why should these People beallowed to incur profit from the national park in any way
or means many access of forest land which were used tobe the habitat of different types of wildlife are now
converted to hotels and resorts of aforesaid businessclass people. As a result these wildlife have been victims ofboth poaches and road accidents eventually, So, to get ridof this serious threat, I would like to point out some
important steps or points which I think is the need of thehour:a) At first there should be a division of the population of
the Kaziranga and surrounding places. The division
should be a) Age old indigenous people b) Newly
settled people . The inhabitants of move that 50
years should only considered as indigenous only.
b) Rapid extension of tourism in kaziranga should bechecked. The local people surrounding the nationalpark should only be permitted to do direct tourism
business in the national Park, whether it is jeep
safari or the hotel business. Some local inhabitants
which have been constantly hampered by the wildlifeof the national park, should get some social, moral
and economic support from the concerned
authorities of the national park.
c) Urge the tourists to enjoy the beauty of the nationalpark by staying only in the eco-tourism or eco-village.
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 375 of 402

d) The tourists which prefers to stay in luxurious hotels
and resorts established by capitalist of outsideshould not be allowed to visit the national park.
e) The Forest Department, Should take necessary
steps to engage the local people directly in tourism
business and should encourage and cooperate themin this regard that should be also after verifying theiridentity only.
f) The landowners surrounding the national park, whowant to sell their lands, should sell the lands only toForest Department and local people only , strictly not
to other outside business class people.
g) The Jeep Safari business should also made limited
to local people only. For this they should have to
produce their permanent residencial certificate. The
Jeep safari programme should be run with keeping inview the Socio-Economic Development of the local
people only.
h) The roadside dhabas, covering from Burhapahar
Hills to Kohara should be closed or try to stop theillegal parking of heavy vehicles by the national
highway 37 from 7 Pm to till 7 am everyday.
i) And if above steps will be failed to implement thenstop the visiting programme of the Kaziranga
National Park for an uncertain period of time.
j. The Elephant safari Programme of Bagori range should
be completely with drown and entire area should be
converted to forest area (middle) only. The Chief reason
behind the rapid population growth at this area isundoubtedly the tourism business, flourishing in this part.
For the last ten years. This area is entirely covered withsuspected citizens. And these people along with otheroutsiders coming for business purposes have beencausing a serious threat to this part of the National Park.
One this Freeland has turned to a base of several
antisocial activates full with suspected citizens.

2. FEELINGS OF THE LOCAL PEOPLE OF
KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARK:
Kaziranga has been a favorite child of the local inhabitants
since the time of Lord Curzon. These People were directly
or indirectly involved with this park a long time before it
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 376 of 402

was declared as National Park Status. The Village People
near the Park used to earn their living by collecting firewoods, fish grasses etc. incurred from kaziranga. It usedbe the grazing field for the cattle’s and thus was the only
source of their livelihood. But after the declaration ofnational park status their sources of income have blockedwhich obviously disappointed these section of the people.
The relation between the forest department and the local
people has been deteriorating day by day. To solve thisserious problem following steps should be taken as
earnest as possible:1. Some artificial highlands should be created from
Dhansrimukh river to Burapahar Hills, (North ofDiffloo river) the boundary area of the park. So thatthe wild animals could stay safely during the time ofannual flood.
2. Proper Irrigation and other facilities should be
provided to the local cultivators, so that they could
engage in agriculture activities through out the year
and thus could recognize by any illegal or suspected
activities or immigration as like older days.
3. Steps should be taken to establish some industrialbased on agricultural produce which could be a loon
to uplift the socio-Economic condition of theindigenous people.
4. In case of any types of loses incurred by thesepeople from wildlife of the national park, propercompensation should be provided to the victims
without any delay.
5. The youth of the village should be appointed for thepost of forest guard. And the inexperience forest
guard appointed in 2012/14 should be removed asthey have no any practical knowledge about thisnational park which is the most essential qualification
for the post of forest guard.

3.GRIVENCES OF CAUSAL FOREST GUARDS
A great deal of casual workers have been serving inkaziranga national park without any proper payment
or wages for the last long years but they are job isstill to be permanent , on the other hand many newly
appointed jobs have regularised neglecting them. So
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 377 of 402

we appeal that these forest guards should be
regularised instantly before any new appointment

4. APPOINTMENT OF V.D.P.
As the forest department and police department
both has failed that to stop the illegal poachingactivities. So a legal V.D.P. should be appointed for alonger period of time on contractual basis.
5. Avoid deforestation activities in karbi hills area so that itremains as natural habitat.

6. All the organizations outside kaziranga should bebanned .
7. Tell the media not to publish any types of
instigating news or rumours.
8. Restrict the use of mobile phones inside thenational park by tourist or the forest guard.
9. A strong task force should be made and thedevelopment works are to be executed after theproper consent of the committee. The head of thecommittee should be and impartial and educatedperson.
10. The local sensitive citizen should be selected andawarded with honourary forest guard award as anencouragement process.
11. All the accused poachers and related to themshould be detained in transit camp.
As a sensitive well wisher and local inhabitant ofkaziranga,I put forward my views through thesepoint. I hope you would try your best to retain thegreatness of this world Heritage site by taking
necessary actions for its all round development.
Thanking you
Yours faithfully
Mr. Kamal Gogoi
Vivek Menon,
Shri R.P.Agarwalla, IFS
Executive Director, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests &WTI
Chief Wildlife Warden,
Assam Forest Department, Govt. of Assam
Basistha Forest Complex,
Guwahati, Assam-781028
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 378 of 402

Dear Shri Agarwalla,
I am very happy to know that the Assam forest department is taking
number of measures at inviting comments from civil society on
conservation of rhinos and Kaziranga NP.
I am thankful to you inviting me to these deliberations which
unfortunately due to prior commitments, I am unable to attend.
However, I have requested Dr. P.C. Bhattachrjee, Trustee, Wildlife
Trust of India (WTI) to Head the delegation which includes Dr. Rathin
Barman, Project Manager, CWRC, Dr. Bhskar Choudhury, RegionalHead, Assam and other team members from our CWRC Field
Station.
I am also enclosing herewith a report that I had written for TRAFFIC
International Network more than 20 years ago entitled “UNDERSIEGE – Poaching and protection of Greater One-horned rhinoceros
in India”. You will note that many things that were present 20 years
ago have come back in a cyclical fashion and therefore, many
recommendation that I have given the could still be considered,. You
may feel free to draw from this report while planning for protection ofrhinos in Kaziranga. In addition, I will prepare a more updated noteon what needs to be done to curb rhino poaching and this will besent you earlier next week.
With best wishes,
Yours sincerely
Vivek Menon
Executive Director
Encl. As above.
Copy to 1. Mr. M.K.Yadava, Director, Kaziranga National Park,
Bokakhat, Dist.- Golaghat, Assam
2. Dr. P.C.Bhattachrjee, Trust, WTI.
3. Dr. Rathin Barman, Project Manager,CWRC
4. Dr. Bhaskar Choudhury, Regional Head, Assam
N.I.Hussain,IPS(Retd.)MEASURES FRO PROTECTION OF RHINOS AT KAZIRANGANATIONAL PARK
The indiscriminate and unabated killings of Rhinos In Assamduring last couple of years particularly in Kaziranga National park,
Chief Vigilance
which got the status of a world heritage site being the only surviving
Officer, APDCL
natural habitat of the famous one-hundred rhinos, has underlined&
Director (Security), two bitter facts in capital letters. That, we Assamese people are too
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 379 of 402

ASEB, Bijuli
Bhawan,Paltanbazar,
Guwahati-1

incompetent to neutralize a handful of poachers who have been
killing one Rhino after another alma daily basis with impunity and inblatant defiance of the state machinery and that we are too
insensitive of comprehending the fact that due to incompetence andcallousness on the part of the present generation Assamese, thismajestic which have been roaming this blessed land of ours since
the pre-historic days will become extinct from the face of the earth inanother 20/30 years if effective measures are not taken immediately
at war-footing for its protection.
The piecemeal measures that have so far been taken toprotect the animal, have not yielded any tangible result as evident in
the continued killing spree of the animal, rather it has emboldened
the poachers to adopt new and more brutal methods of killing to feed
an ever growing market of rhino horns that has been thriving on
myths and superstitions. The entry of several break –away groupsof extremist into the rhino poaching scene lately has added a new
dimension to the menace calling for some very strong practicalmeasures, not high sounding rhetorics. The need of the hour istherefore to chalk out a well-thought-out and well coordinatedoperational plan defining the roles of various concerned departments
like forest, Police, PWD etc. besides the district administration andput the same in place duly backed by sufficient man-power,
equipments and other logistics. I suggest the following measures tobe incorporated in the operational plan if found feasible.
j) Since extremist elements and professional poachers arehaving a free run in Kaziranga and its vicinity to strike at will,
the first and foremost task on the part of Govt. is to effect“Area Dominance” by inducting 2 (two) full battalions ofregular Assam Armed Bn into the area which will serve as astrong deterrent to the poachers and other anti-socials
preventing them from venturing into the National Park andadjoining areas.
k) The vulnerable areas, poaching point of view, should be
identified and atleast 12 (twelve) nos. of BOP type Police
posts should be set-up at strategic points which will bemanned by the above noted AP Bn personnel in two platoon
strength. While these BOPs will be commanded by officers of
Sr.S.I. or ABI rank, there should be three wing Headquartersof Company strength which will be commanded by young
Dy.SPs/Asstt. Commandants.
l) The Area responsibility of each BOPs should be earmarked
and the AP Bn personnel will cover their area through footpatrolling, ambush patrolling, night patrolling etc. so that no
intruder can slip into their area and kill animals. A SOP(standard operating procedure) should also be prepared for
the BOP personnel so they can perform their task without
confusion in coordination with forest personnel and nearby

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 380 of 402

BOPs.
m) Besides wireless communication, each BOPs should beequipped with sufficient nos. of mobile phones so that vital
informations can beexchanged between BOPs, wing
Headquarters and also with informers to be engaged by wingcommanders. Few reliable persons of villages located infringe areas of Kaziranga National Park should be engaged
as informers on payment of nominal source money and theyshould be issued mobile phones so that any movement ofsuspicions persons near their villages could be informed to
the nearest BOP without loss of time. In case of network
problem in the area, service providers may be requested toerect one or two towers at suitable points to provide foot print
to Kaziranga and adjoining areas.
n) Each BOPs should be allotted two vehicles (One GYPSY andone SUV) so that AP Bn personnel can rush to the spot onreceipt of information about suspicious movement andengage/ neutralize the intruders before damage is done.
o) Besides sophisticated weapons like AK-47, AK-56 etc, theBOP personnel should be equipped with sufficient nos. of
binoculars, night-vision devices, flash lights, search lights etc,
to enable them to perform their task in a professional manner.
p) Concerned district authorities may be asked to promulgate
prohibitory orders under section 144 of Cr. P.C. restricting
movement of persons with any type of fire arms inside
Kaziranga and adjoining areas with the exception of Police,
Security force and forest personnel. The district administration
may also be asked to put restriction on general from putting
on Khaki or army fatigue colored apparel inside Kaziranga
and nearby areas so that extremist elements and poachers
cannot enter Kaziranga masquerading as police or forest
personnel.
q) To avoid confusion and possible mistaken identity, it should
be made mandatory on the part of Police and forest personnel
deployed in Kaziranga to remain in full uniform while on duty
and they should be asked to put on their name plates andinvariably display their photo identity cards.
r) On the Northern side of the National Park, two river police
outposts with sufficient nos. of AP Bn personnel and powerboats should be set up at two convenient places so thatproper watch can be maintained over Kaziranga by carryingout river patrols on Brahmaputra.
s) As a long time measure, PWD authorities, in co-ordination
with forest department may identify the most frequented
animal corridors of Kaziranga across the National Highway
and prepare proposal for construction of 5/6 fly-overs (veryHigh) of 2/3 KMs length over those corridors so that animals
can cross over to Karbi Hills during high floods, forest fire or
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 381 of 402

other natural calamities without fear of being run over by
spreeding vehicles or felling to poacher’s bullets.
t)
The Commandants of the two dedicated battalions should
be entrusted with the task of making their own fool-proof
operational plans to make Kaziranga Kaziranga a poacherfree zone. These two dedicated AP Bn should not be
entrusted with any duties other than protecting the rhinos andother animals of Kaziranga from the poacher’s bullets.

Comments on Chapters
Chapter Name
2

Richard Emslie

Comments
Page 10 - "now increasingly become difficult for thewild animals to moveacross to the Hills during high flood season," andPage 15 Fragementationof Corridors - The need to maintain and secure
corridors is a MAJOR issue
that needs to be addressed. As outlined on p15 thismay require purchase ofland such as old tea gardens.
Having a long term Assam Rhino Range Expansion
Program is desirable but justlike the BRREP project which started in KwaZuluNatal province but has since
expanded outside the province; once all the suitablelocal areas forre-established populations within Assam have beenstocked; then for the goodof the species other alternatives outside Assamshould then be looked at. In
order to keep Kaziranga productive it will benecessary to translocate someanimals out.
P19 Mimosa is a serious problem. As I suggested
earlier the rule
stipulating no chemicals can be used inside the park
should be re-examined.
Not all herbicides are long acting.
P20 The present is the time to be expanding thepark's estate before it is
too late. Where possible opportunities should be

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 382 of 402

looked for where local
communities could benefit from having the park nextdoor.
2

PC Bhattachrjee

2Ranjit Barthakur

Dear allFew points:
Page 8 : It is better to give full reference of thestudy made by Sharma and Acharjee with year.
Page 12 : expert committee- year ?
Page 15: Number of corridors ? :All of thempossibly donot come under the existing list of
corridors. Some of them might be "stress dependent
alternative movement tracks".Possibly there were
only 4 corridors , which are being disturbed andmore opportunistic locations are being used.A bit ofexplanation might be better.
Other : creation of "high land " within the park with the de-siltation of the wetland-( two in one
activity) should be mentioned as a part of crossing
the NH.
P.C.Bhattacharjee
Please go ahead....
Regards,
Ranjit Barthakur

2

B S Bonal

The efforts put by you for preparing the draft report
is really appreciable. However, the following aresome of the suggestions for your consideration andto include appropriately if deem fit:
1.
On the introduction of the members against
B.S.Bonal, if you feel, may include following too, in
addition to what you have mentioned :He has a long standing experience in wildlife
management both in in-situ and ex-situ for morethan 27 years that includes more than 7 years in
Kaziranga National Park as DFO and Director, as
Dy. Field Director in Manas National Park andDirector, Assam State Zoo, Guwahati and National
Zoological Park, New Delhi. He played a key roleas Founder Chief Operating Officer (COO) of Core
Committee of Task Force for Rhino Translocation
within Assam under IRV 2020.
2.
I did not find the component of staff welfare.
As you know, the Karizanga National Park Staff

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 383 of 402

Welfare Society (KNPSWS) was constituted in 1999
which has been strengthened over the period andextended help not only to the staff of KNP but evento the people concern for protection of rhinos in
Kaziranga – same could be mentioned tostrengthen further in the report.
3.
Under the head habitat- degradation – theeffective control on use of ‘pesticides’ by tea
gardens situated in the upper stream of
Brahamputra beyond Kaziranga and surrounding
Kaziranga National Park, as well as use of“invasive species” viz Memosa etc. for soil
amelioration that the tea garden people have beenusing – could be included.
4.
The declaration of Eco Sensitive Zone should
be expedited to control
future unplanneddevelopment in the vicinity of Kaziranga.
5.
Involvement of existing hoteliers or resort
people to assist in anti poaching work to Kaziranga
authority for keeping eye on movement of such
poachers/ traders etc. I remember, there was abody called “Shaku” i.e. ‘eye’ constituted evolving
hoteliers & other stakeholders in order to help the
Kaziranga authority – That should be incorporated
somewhere in the report.
6.
The “Kaziranga National Park SamanvayaCommittee” involving the local people was formed
who used to be very helping hand for information
gathering etc. - also needs to be revived andrevamped.
7.
To control the erosion on southern bank ofBrahamputra at Kaziranga from Dhanbari-Agaratoli
to Arimora and Bhawani, there were suggestions toconstruct embankment or spur at the upper streamof Brahamputra at the confluence of Dhanshree andBrahamputra to check the course of Brahamputra
water coming towards further south that had alreadycaused damage to Dhanshree, Debeshwari areas.

2

PIL 66/2012

Rajendra Garawad

I have a minor correction to suggest. In theproile of members, I would like to request
you to change the sentence 'He has done

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 384 of 402

considerable primary work on rhino
population dynamics ' as'He has done
considerable primary work on population
dynamics of Kaziranga rhinos'. Rest of thedescription is ok. The reasons for this change
is that much work has already been done on
the Nepal rhino by Laurie but there was no
study on Kaziranga rhinos till I did it my thesis
work on it.
Further, I would like to suggest about theinclusion about 'functional connectivity' and'Precautionary principle approach' in thereport at suitable place as these concepts will
be useful for the park at a later date.
Thank you and Regards,
4

Richard Emslie

Re chapter 4
Amazed how small the foreign tourist number
still is.
While tourism needs
to be managed to make sure one doesn't destroy
or pollute the conservation
area it also offers opportunities to create
jobs and businesses to help
benefit and economically empower poor local
people living around the park.
Having them on sides is obviously better thanthem feeling alienated anddisliking the Park.

4

Hirdesh Mishra

This chapter is also ok.
You have done lot of hard work.
You have mentioned many to do items in this entire
document. They are found almost on all pages.
So we will perhaps need to put all these in a to dotask sheet with probable dates to track them.
Any thoughts Sir?

4

Sonali Ghosh

1. Since 87% of the fringe villagers are marginal or
landless, it would be important to link tourism as analternate livelihood support (seasonal / non-paddy
season) through EDCs.
2. Very short and abrupt Chapter as compared toother Chapters.

5

Keshav Varma

These are good points.
My suggestion is that we involve theDivisional Commissioners in ensuring thatPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 385 of 402

all aspects of district administration are
involved including the police . Usually
Div Commissioners have the time
Deputy Commissioners / DMs should be fed
with evidence on encroachments that areinterfering with the corridors. You must
make that evidence public knowledge
through NGOs
Develop a good alliance in Delhi, say a
Rhino Club , to ensure the news goes tothe right circles. Regular communication
can work wonders
Ask media to write about staff that has
taken firm action against poachers.
Celebrate them5

B S Bonal

Regarding UAV, if the army are not inclined to givethe operational part to Kaziranga National Park
authority, then it could always be done by army
themselves to operate for the same in collaboration
with Kaziranga National Park authority/
10. Regarding the de-horning of Rhinoceros – I
am of the view that it should not be adopted aspolicy in any case. However, if opportunity comes,
could be done as side activities along with collectionof blood samples, taking measurement etc. while
tranquilizing the animals during the process ofrationalization and translocate to new site. I repeat
not to use the dehorning as a policy.

6

Richard Emslie

Black rhino NOT largest member of rhinos found outof 5 species. Rather say it is a browsing rhino unlike
the white rhino which is a grazer or GOH which is amixed feeder.
Javan – could say from having a wide distribution it
is now currently restricted to only one population.
Page 48
Would be good to also show the Kaz numbers as agraph showing the success story. Maybe there is adanger here in that someone may think “What is the
problem?”. If so could add a comment like – Whilenumbers continue to increase, poaching has also
increased in recent years. While current levels ofpoaching are sustainable (there are still more births
than deaths in the population) it will be necessary to

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 386 of 402

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 387 of 402

making allowances for any poaching) so at apoaching rate of 1.34% we would consider it OK to
go ahead and translocated out another 85 animals(3.64% of population) out of a 2013 Kaziranga sized
population.
Do you have your translocation information by year
(number of rhinos translocated in and out of
Kaziranga). I could then redo the analysis andpossible write you something on the apparent
decline in population performance following its
increase in density.
Page 52 - Confusion here over the term removal.
In Africa this would refer to translocations. Suggest
put losses (poaching + natural mortality) and gains( births)
P53 Some studies (Richard Emslie 2005 andupdated in 2014)
Also not sure your “no of years for total removal” is a
useful analysis. I think poaching as % of population
size would be more useful – this for example would
be 3.28% in 1984 and just under an estimated 5% in
1985. However the population still continued to
grow at this rate as densities were likely to be well
below ECC and underlying growth rates were likely
in excess of 5%. If you had been losing 10% of yourrhinos to poaching each year that would have not besustainable.
Better to say Kaziranga has started showing signsof density dependent reductions in population
growth rates rather than “may be reaching density
dependent growth”
The number of one year old calves/female is usefuldata that clearly shows a decline in reproductive
performance over time. If you have the breakdowns
to do it I would suggest you also show calves (<3.5years) to adult female and 1 year old calves to adultfemale (rather than just total female population. The
number of calves (<3.5yrs) per adult female is agood indicator of both intercalving intervals and calf
mortality rates. Another thing you could look at
would be % of population that is calves <3.5 years
and % that is calves <1 year. Trouble with only
looking at 1 year at a time is there is a lot of noise in
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 388 of 402

the data. Growth rates vary a lot from year to year
and there are birth lags as a female that gives birth
this year can’t give birth the next. For that reason it
is a good idea to model underlying growth rates fora three year window. You then move the window
one year ahead and redo the calculations. Such amoving window analysis helps smooth out much of
the year to year noise in the data and allows you tobetter look at the underlying patterns in the data.
The SADC RMG has been collecting annual
standardised status reports on its black rhino
populations since 1989 and form time to time Keryn
Adcock has done an analysis of all this data. She
can provide you with interpretations of what different
calves/adult female ratios etc mean in terns of blackrhino. If you want to ask her to interpret a number
she can be skyped at keryn57 or emailed at
keryna@telkomsa.net.
Points you don’t really mention are that in order toimprove productivity of the Kaziranga population it
will be necessary to remove more animals every
year but this assumes there are enough suitable
new homes where you can invest rhino. Also
reduced underlying growth rates have the same
effects ultimately as poaching – you end up withfewer rhino. If you had a metapopulation of 2000
rhinos and were able to manage them to get 7%
growth for a decade compared to only 3% for a
decade the difference in 10 years would be 1,246
fewer rhino. A lost rhino is a lost rhino whether it
was poached or whether it wasn’t born or died to
suboptimal biological management. If you are notmoving surplus animals to new areas another way
to try to improve productivity is to expand the area
available to rhinos in the park boosting the park’s
EEC in the process.
The other issue is that while current levels ofpoaching are sustainable a continued increase inpoaching levels has the potential to become
unsustainable and threaten to start reversing thegains achieved over the last century. Now is the timeto act to keep poaching at manageable levels before
it is too late and out of control poaching starts tocause population declines.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 389 of 402

However at least the poaching you are experiencing
should help improve underlying performance. As I
showed in my 2005 and updated 2014 analyses thisappears to have been the case before when for aperiod following heavier poaching underlying
reproductive performance actual increased before
tailing off again once poaching was brought back tovery low levels and densities continued to increase.
However what would be interesting is to contrast therelative impact of your major floods on mortalities
compared to poaching levels (inside park andoutside park boundaries). This may highjlight theimportance of having suitable high ground areas
outside the park (such as tea gardens) added to thepark’s estate.
B S Bonal
6(Revised)

Congrats for compiling such a nice documents withmore input to it.
I wish that due credit and reference be made of thecontributors ie founder DFO,Directors and all those
had been there with all the odds and also conducted
Census of rhino and other animals which it self is aherculean exercise.. special mention be made of Lat
P Lahon, Muhi Miri etc.
Thanks6

1. The description on Rhino needs references as
several facts are stated.
2. Section 6.2.1...the method should be stated as
TOTAL COUNT instead of direct visual count.
A block map with a pictorial representation would begreat, as this is unique to Kaziranga and must be
highlighted.
3. with improvements in technology and the launchof SMART, why can’t the compartments
managed/monitored on a real time basis. Iinfact theyshould form the basic unit for each and every
conservation action in the field. With expansion,
does 81 compartments also need a revision?
4. The merits and demerits of the direct visual countmethods must be discussed more on a scientificbasis. Has there been any publications (fromelsewhere) that suggests changes to improve thismethod ? The linear regression and mortality
predictions is a very simplistic depiction of a highly
complex
model
for
which
standardised
PHVA/Resource function models are available. It
would be good to conduct one of these workshops

PIL 66/2012

Sonali Ghosh

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 390 of 402

for Rhinos at Kaziranga .
5. Density dependant reduction of populationargument needs some strong backing with peerreviewed published information. Calf per capita
female ratio is too low to indicate a declining trend.
What about carrying capacity? And whether the
existing carrying capacity of KNO can be increased?
3. Conclusion (FOR THE VERY EXHAUSTIVE
CHAPTER, THE CONLUSIONS READS VERYABRUPTLY AND NEED MORE COHESIVENESS)
A net gain of 10 or below would lead the
population to decline. Currently it is 39,
but may get hit by excessive poaching,if not controlled. (Please rephrase, notclear; net gain of what ? what is 39?)
3.If poaching is brought to halt, some
population, about 25 in numbers, mustbe translocated elsewhere in safe rhino
habitats to keep the population of
Kaziranga productive. (Please rephrase,
not clear; only 25?)
7

Rajendra Garawad

Dear Sir,
thank you very much for sharing the
document on Kaziranga. I think the writeup
has come up very well and this document will
not only serve the purpose of the court but it
will also act as a reference for Kaziranga. It
shows the critical thinking done while
preparing the document and your writing
inspires me

7

PIL 66/2012

K Ramesh

The document looks fine from theperspective of requirement for court.
I have marked a few typo/space issues.
I have also been thinking as to why weshould not target good proportion ofmales for VHF and satellite collars sothat we can keep close vigil of thearea. Meanwhile, based on what you
have generated, create a risk map

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 391 of 402

and provide enhanced security
whenever the animal moves to riskzone. Just athought.
7

B S Bonal

8.
In Chapter 7 – in connection with the anti
poaching work – perhaps you could refer the “antipoaching activities” followed in the past with threelayer barriers (may be available in your office or in
Kaziranga Centenary Website)(i)
Anti poaching staff inside the park(ii)
Surrounding villages through the various
working societies or groups to have a better
network.
(iii)
Involving various line departments viz.
police, BSF, Civil Administration, Army etc. which
was to be covered in three phases :(a) Pro-active phase before entering to thepark with proactive action.
(b) Re-active phase – reaction of the anti
poaching staff inside the park with Reactive
action &(c) The post exit phase – follow up action
with judiciary action.
To this effect, you could refer to the proceedings of
the Rhino Specialist Group Meeting held in
Kaziranaga National Park in 1998.

11-14

Rajendra Garawad

thanks for sharing the document containing
many innovative approaches for managing
Kaziranga. I had a quick glance on the
document and I have suggestion for page 122
under GIS. I have tried my hands at GARIIASIand I must say that the software at this stage
is not that user friendly. The user manual isfar from complete and the software gave me
an impression that it is a combination of QGISand GRASS perhaps with some added
features.
In my personal view, we should promote abundle of free software (of which you are an
ardent supporter) with a scope for inclusion of
GRASS, QGIS and others like SAGA etc. I havebeen using both QGIS and GRASS for the last
6 years and I feel that these are quite
powerful and may fulill the tasks of

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 392 of 402

Kaziranga. I am enclosing a presentation on
looding simulation of Kaziranga carried out
by me in GRASS for your kind information.
The steps followed were as follows: I
downloaded SRTM data for Kaziranga andoverlaid it on fcc of Kaziranga. Next I foundout the elevation at seed point towards theeast of Agaratoli range which was around 60
metre or so. At this seed point the water level
was progressively increased above theelevation to ind out the water spread in thedownstream. Although it is a crude modelwith very little data, still it perfectly simulated
the low of water in Kaziranga. In the previous
management plan of Kaziranga it is writtenthat whenever the irst wave of lood arrives,water enters Kaziranga from Burapahar sidethen moves eastwards. Surprisingly, a similarwater movement pattern was also noticed in
the simulation.
Sir, I am happy to read that you have notsupported the splitting of Kaziranga into
multiple divisions (page 152-153) and instead
gave importance to uniied command control.
Dividing KNP into 4 divisions will bring in
more politics, reduced eiciency and there
will be sudden spurt in blame game byvarious oicers. Finally, Kaziranga will lose
importance due to internal squabbling
between oicers. Therefore, Kaziranga should
not be divided further at any cost. Instead
more oicers can be brought in for
specialized tasks as suggested by you.
15

Hirdesh Mishra

Excellent compilation and adaptation.
Its fantastic.
Their Lordships, the HC Judges, will be blown away.

15

Richard Emslie.

No comments except finding ways the Park can help
improved the lives of surrounding communities will
be key.

15

Sonali Ghosh

1. Is there a way to link Chapter 15 AND Chapter 4 ?
...EDC s would have to be part of the Green
Framework, anyway!
2. Kaziranga Landscape under the Green Growth
Framework / KLCDA shall be better depicted

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 393 of 402

through a Map!
3. Why have a separate guideline for KLCDA, when
the concept of Kaziranga Tiger Reserve (withzonations etc) already exists ? As of now we aremanaging our National Parks (and lately Tiger
Reserves) as IUCN 11 Protected Area category. TheKLCDA though ambitious in some way dillutes thisidea of a strict ‘wilderness’ or nature reserve.
Besides, putting monetary terms to conservation isagainst the basic grain of India’s wildlife
conservation ethos which is intrinsic and socioculturally ‘tolerant’ towards wildlife to a greater
extent atleast in Assam.
Linkages with TCP and the Biodiversity Committees
and KLCDA are not clear and there is a ideaology
conflict. Are we talking of ‘tiger centric’ or ‘people
centric’ models of conservation/development.
4. Instead links with REDD+ would be ideal.
5. does not have a conclusion.
16

Richard Emslie

16.3 Low prosecution rate mentioned since 2006 in
16.3 needs to be addressed. This has been aproblem too in many African range states. Having
specialist prosecutors (like rec 5 on p211) andmeetings with judiciary in the field has helped.
The use of asset forfeiture for those convicted is an
important tool and I support this proposal. Also
could consider provisionally preventing disposal ofcertain assets prior to trial of suspects to stop themgetting rid of assets prior to trial and hiding away themoney.
Re Dog Squad – essential to have right handlers
and also no good if they then don’t regularly practiceand work with their dogs daily. You cannot expect
trained dogs to perform if they have just been left
idle for ages without regular stimulation and training.
Can think perhaps of different kinds of dogs fromsniffer detection dogs, to field tracker dogs andpossible attack dogs when you have poacher visual.
Postmortem protocol – need to add something on
RhoDIS sample collection using approved sample
collection kits by accredited sample collector.
16.3.5 Fully support development of RhoDIS for
GOH. This has been so useful in Africa.
Investigators and Prosecutors here are very
appreciative of what this adds. Great Cindy and Rod
were able to visit.

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 394 of 402

In terms of elephant poaching and ivory seizures
recommend you as far as is possible follow
guidelines as set out in new United Nations Officeon Drugs & Crime Guidelines for forensic laboratory
methods and procedures of Ivory sampling andanalysis (in final stages of peer review prior to
publication shortly). You may wish to request
Sinead Brophy (Sinead.Brophy@unodc.org) to be
put on the mailing list for these guidelines when they
are published.
16.6 SOP’s are recognised as important by some ofour top rhino managers like Tony Conway. Also
perhaps identify Key Performance Indicators toassess staff by. If you want to discuss with Tony his
e-mail is Tonyc@kznwildlife.com
You mention a Tiger Conservation Plan – what
about a Rhino Conservation Plan? – not just for
Kaziranga but also for Assam and India as a wholeand perhaps even a joint regional India/Nepal rhinogroup (such as the SADC RMG).
Why must visitors provide a photograph ? You say
checking for any plastic bottles or eatables ? This
seems a bit tourist unfriendly. In addition to warningfor not littering this needs to be backed up withsignificant penalties for those caught doing so.
However in addition to the stick approach perhaps
could try carrot approach and use posters to try tofoster pride in a rubbish free park.
I realise the capacity of wooden bridges may be a
problem but another option may be to allow somelarger people carrying vehicles that can each carry
more people to increase the people/vehicle ratio.
As for charging for still cameras – most of these
today can also capture video. Smart phones thesedays can do both too. Take it you are referring tolarger video cameras when charging Rs 800. As aforeign tourist I would find it annoying to be charged
for bringing in a camera in addition to paying anentry fee when this is not standard practice for manyother wildlife areas around the world. I would muchprefer the right to take photos/home video to beincorporated the entrance fee. However forcommercial photographers and film makers then it is
OK to charge a filming fee. Thus would suggest you
differentiate between amateurs and professional
photographers/film-makers.
Again with regards to Range Expansion – fill up
Assam first but thinking about what will be best for
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 395 of 402

GOH in the long term would suggest you keep the
option of expansion to other areas outside Assamonce you have put sufficient founder rhino into all
potentially suitable sites in Assam.
Pleased to see plans to implement RhoDIS under
16.
Also once you have stocked all the possible Assamreserves under your range expansion project (16.8)
consideration should be given long term toexpanding this programme outside Assam in thesame way the Ezemvelo-KZN-Wildlife/WWF Black
Rhino Range Expansion Project initially justfocussed on KwaZulu-Natal Province in South Africa
but has more recently expanded its focus to include
other areas in S.Africa and possibly consideringother areas in neighbouring countries. By removing
animals you can help improve productivity andperformance of remaining animals.
The graph below shows modelled underlying net
annual growth rates (from 1 Jan 2008) after allowing
for translocations (blue) and underlying net
reproductive performance after allowing fortranslocations and man-induced mortalities including
poaching (orange). I Kaz is India Kaziranga. All theother sites are Key1 rhino areas in the “Big4” African
rhino range states. The Kaziranga estimatedunderlying net average recent (since 2008) growthis 2.43% and underlying net reproductive
performance of 2.91%. These are below what wewould have as minimum target levels of 5% in Africa
and suggest the population’s performance is starting
to experience density dependent reduction in
reproductive performance. The graph below showsthat this underlying performance is lower than anumber of Key1 African populations that have been
more aggressively biologically managed for growth.
By way of comparison since 2008 a total of 8 GOH
have been translocated from Kaziranga compared
to a net 543 removed over the same period from
Hluhluwe-iMfolozi Park, Great Fish River GR ,Madikwe GR and PIlanesberg NP in South Africa
over the same period. These four S.African reserves
currently hold an estimated 3,651 black and whiterhino compared to Kaziranga’s 2,329. If removals
from Kaziranga had been at a similar average %PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 396 of 402

level to the 4 SA populations, 346 would have beentaken off over the period and thus Kaziranga’s
removal levels have been around 2.3% of theofftake from these four Key1 S.African rhino areas.
16

Sonali Ghosh1. The Manas National Park has an area of 500 sq
km, and the Manas Tiger Reserve has a notified
core area of 840 sq km including the barnadi WLS.
Please modify core area as CRITICAL TIGER
HABITAT.
2. Does not have a conclusion.

16

Amit Sharma

I would like to bring to your notice thefollowing points for consideration 1. The RhoDIS data custody should be with
the Assam Forest Dept. or a special bodyunder the MoEF instead of NIC/ NTCA/ etc for
all practical purpose;
2. The Rhino Task Force formed in 2005 isformed in the proposed ARREP form. Kindlyrefer to the original notiication. The IRV2020
is developed to implement the ARREO by the
Task Force, as such I believe the present
write-up looks a bit contradictory and may be
modiied as seems necessary. What we need
to focus on is to strengthen the IRV2020
program (all its objectives) and more assured
funds and manpower.
3. Add disease surveillance under R&D for the
future management of rhinos.
4. Co-ordinated eforts, uniform procedures
and central data server for crimes foraddressing wildlife crime in all the rhino PA's

17

PIL 66/2012

Sonali Ghosh

1. Sarai Act 1867 should be replaced with the new
Land Acquisition Act / Land Development act (2014)
2. SMART guard should be ST or LT measure. A
long preparatory Phase will yield better results.
Immediate removal of old staff may also be
detrimental. The reasons as to why they are there(in some cases over 30 years needs to beascertained first). There needs to be a transitional
phase with handing down of knowledge andexperience. Staff amenities should be IM instead ofSM.
3. Section 18.3 Conservation Fee, Congestion Fee
etc have been mentioned. Has a road map or detailsof this been worked? Will this be agreeable to theSave Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 397 of 402

public?..typo error in 7th line (Rs 50.00)
4. The Chapter Does not have a conclusion.
17-18

Richard Emslie

Under 11 – Would be nice to try adaptive
management research on efficacy of short acting
herbicides on significant alien plants.
In Budget estimates for habitat improvement
programme – has an amount been included tosupport adaptive management research into theeffectiveness of different treatments?

17-18

Hirdesh Mishra

Looks fine to me.
After all these are estimates of time and money.
The concepts are good and PSUs must put theirmoney where there mouth is.

17-18

Hem Chandra Borah

We have gone through your proposedsuggestions for submitting to the Honourable
High Court in the greater interest of Kaziranga
National Park. You have rightly projectedmany positive aspects for the protection of
wildlife in Kaziranga National Park. Yet, yoursuggestions in some points go against theinterest and sentiments of local people whohave been residing here since time
immemorial.
1.
In article 11.5 Eviction of
Encroachments’:The
villagesaround Kaziranga are of two types :(i) There were villages aroundKaziranga before the declaration of
the habitat of one horned Rhino as
Kaziranga reserve forest sanctuary in
1908. Thesevillagers residing
generation after generation are thesons of the soil. Almost all of them
have permanent patta of land under
Kaziranga Mouza.
2.
The encroachers in Deosur
Encroachment are suspected citizens
who supposed to give shelter to thepoachers and mostly engaged in
rampant ishing in the Beels of
Kaziranga National Park. This Deosur
Encroachment is entirely a playground of some politicians who

PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 398 of 402

selected Kaziranga National Park as
a right place for re-habilitating someBangladeshi
familiarfor
their
personal and political interest. The
entire Deosur Encroachment area
including the animal corridors may
be evicted using irm hand of theGovt. of Assam and rehabilitate themin some other place.
The proposal in chapter – 13 “TheKaziranga Landscape Conservation andDevelopment Authority” seems to beanti-local people. We the people ofKaziranga believe in peaceful coexistence of man and animal. No one
will ever forget the sentiment of Nigona
Chikari who inspired and convinced
Madam Lady Carjon- the wife of thethen Viceroy Lord Carjon to conserve
one horned rhino in Kaziranga in 1903
and this sentiment still prevails in themind of the local villagers.
This human aspect and sentiments of
the local villagers have totally been
ignored in your suggestions. There aremany instances that these villagers are
not enemies of the wildlife but
unrecognized forest guards of the park.
During lood season they give shelter tothe afected animals. They work withthe forest guards hand in hand during
the lood season. At night they keep
vigilance over the afected animals sothat they do not fall prey in the handsof poachers.
In your language – “Kaziranga is a nameattached with the sentiment of thepeople of Assam, and a word
recognized across the Globe as theabode of the Great one horned
rhinoceros”. And taking advantage ofthis sentiment of the local people, someNGOs aresucking Kaziranga asparasites. They pretend to represent
the local people. Ignorance andsimplicity of the locals are the capitals
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 399 of 402

of these NGOs – whom the Government
also relies upon.
Should we believe that a hugeorganization like Forest Department of
the Govt. of Assam is still lake of skilled
man power for planning and executionof even very small projects of thedepartment? It seems that this forest
department is dependent on the NGOs.
The time is not far when thedepartment will be administered bysuch NGOs – sitting in A.C. room fromabroad and outside the state.
Of late it has come to the knowledge ofthe local people that on and from 2007,
the world heritage site – Kaziranga
National Park has been included in themap of tiger reserve and declared theentire area as the core area of tiger
reserve.
The entire process of converting
Kaziranga National Park to a Tiger
Project had been carried out silently
keeping the local villagers in the dark –although there is a law of theEnvironment Ministry of India that
“Written consent from villagers is amust for new wildlife habitats”. We, thepeople of Kaziranga donot know when
and where the public hearing took placein support of such imposition andenactment of law. The people ofKaziranga could know about the tiger
project in Kaziranga seven years after
its imposition – although rule prevents
for public hearing.
We, being the public of this heritagesite – believe that imposition of Tiger
Project in a place where a rare species
like one horned Rhinoceros are
surviving with many odds – is not a wise
decision. The imposition of tiger project
on a world heritage site like KNP is
nothing but a cruel and crooked
attempt of the Department. The illintention of the master minds to create
PIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 400 of 402

the entire area from Koliabor to
Numaligarh an under developed area
and a paradise for poachers andencroachers
have
been
strongly
protested by the local people. We
oppose the anti-human activities of theForest Department in the name of Tiger
Projected in Kaziranga National Park
area. Further we do not see any reason
for funding towards conservation of thewildlife under two diferent names
which may lead to corrupt practices.
Hence, We demand :1.
Withdraw Tiger Project from
Kaziranga National Park.
2.
Allow
all
types
of
development including Tourism inand around Kaziranga.
3.
Kaziranga is famous for OneHorned
Rhino;
notforTiger.
Therefore, keep the fame and nameas it is.
4.
Convert NH – 37 from Koliabor
to Numaligarh to a four lane road forbetter communication of the tourist
visiting Kaziranga National Park andfor efective security of the wildlife.
5.
Secure the life and land
properties of the indigenous peopleof Kaziranga and do not deprive
them from the legacy of paternalland property.
6.
We oppose the formation of
Kaziranga Landscape Development
committee without a public hearing
as per constitutional right.
7.
We want a public hearing
before declarative of Echo-sensitive
Zone in Kaziranga. In mapping EchoSensitive Zone, the consent of local
people must be sought respecting
their sentiment. . .Any enactment of law ,declaration which can hurt the life, livelyhood andPIL 66/2012

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 401 of 402

fundamental rights of the local people residing
nearby KNP should be avoided.

We hope your good self will give
positive approach to our demands andsuggestion before submitting yourproposals to the Honourable High Court.
All

Ramesh Krishnamurthy Many thanks, and compliments for all the efforts.
Once all the chapters are compiled and a zero draftof final report together all
chapters may be communicated for final around of
inputs.

All

PIL 66/2012

Dr. Rajesh Gopal

Dear Yadavji,
Please recall our recent discussion. Put all
this in the TCP format which is a statutory
requirement and NTCA will recognize only that.
Best
Rg

Save Kaziranga Save Rhinos to Save Your Future

Page No. 402 of 402