Protected Areas Wildlife Protection Act 1972 Tourism Essay Example

These countries are protected based on the environmental and cultural values. Harmonizing to IUCN, a protected country is, A clearly defined geographical infinite, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effectual agencies, to accomplish the long-run preservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.

Marine protected countries besides are included in the list of protected countries. Under the WLPA, the province authorities can declare an country of flower or equal 'ecological, faunal, flowered, structural, natural or zoological significance' a sanctuary or a national park.

Public entry is banned in a protected country and the devastation of the home ground along with its wildlife is prohibited and can ensue in serious effects.

Protected countries play a crucial role in preserving biodiversity and conserving the environment. They are essential for maintaining ecosystem stability, balancing ecological processes, safeguarding water sources, soils, and protecting humans from natural disasters. Additionally, these areas are vital for indigenous or local communities as they depend on the sustainable utilization of the region's resources.

Protected countries serve as a hub for local communities, offering respite from hectic work schedules and promoting tranquility. They also play a vital role in research, education, and sustainable land management. These areas heavily rely on tourism to support their economies. Article 8 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) acknowledges the importance of protected regions. Nevertheless, the adverse impacts of climate change and pollution pose significant threats to these priceless locations.

The degradation of these countries is primarily caused by a lack of political support and inadequate funding. The WCPA is the only organization actively involved in protecting these areas.

One of the 6 committees of IUCN, WCU was established in 1948.

It provides guidelines to assist in categorizing the management of protected areas.

The text discusses protected areas, both domestic and international, and their classification into eight distinct categories based on purpose. A 2000 IUCN report reveals that there are 30,000 protected areas worldwide, covering a total area of 13,250,000 sq.km., with only 1% of the world's seas currently under protection.

In terms of India specifically, protected areas encompass approximately 156,700 sq.km., which accounts for around 4.95% of the total surface area. A study conducted in 2001 estimated that these protected areas contain roughly 5000 villages.

India has had protected areas since as early as1935 and adheres to the categorization system established by the IUCN. This system includes various types such as National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries,Biosphere Reserves,and Conservation Reserves among others.

Unfortunately, natural areas in India are facing threats due to rapid urbanization and industrialization.

The number of protected countries in India has increased over time. In 1988, there were 54 national parks and 372 sanctuaries, covering around 3.34% of the country's geography. According to the Wildlife Institute of India (WII), by 2002, India had a total of 578 wildlife protected countries, which accounted for about 4.70% of its geographical area. The WII recommends expanding the number of wildlife protected areas to reach a total of 870, including 163 national parks and 707 wildlife sanctuaries. This would result in using approximately 5.74% of the state's geographical area as stated by Rodgers, Panwar, and Mathur from WII. Some regions in India have a notably high percentage of protected countries.

This is because of the requirements for declaring a protected country. NATIONAL PARKS A National park is a collection of natural

lands that is declared by authorities. It is established for recreational purposes and the preservation of nature. National Parks belong to the category II type of protected countries according to IUCN. There are 7000 national Parks worldwide.

The Northeast Greenland National Park is the largest national park in the universe. National parks are declared under subdivision 35, 38, and 66. To be declared as a national park, a country must go through several phases: purpose presentment, determination of rights, announcement presentment, inquiry, acquisition of rights, and concluding presentment. However, this process is not necessary if the land rights have been extinguished or if the land is under provincial authority.

India's first national park was Hailey National Park which was established in 1935. It was later renamed as Jim Corbett National Park.

There are a total of 96 national parks in India as of April 2007. National parks have a higher level of authority and offer a greater degree of protection compared to sanctuaries. The regulations and rules governing national parks are more strict. It is possible to establish a national park within or adjacent to a sanctuary.

WILDLIFE SANCTUARIES

Wildlife sanctuaries are areas designated for the safeguarding and revitalization of endangered species. These areas are created through governmental ordinances.

According to Section 38, the creation of a sanctuary is permitted by the cardinal authorities, but only with approval from the province authorities. However, it is prohibited to establish a sanctuary within another already existing sanctuary as specified in Sections 26A, 38(1), and 66(3).

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has set specific requirements for creating sanctuaries, with the main goal being the protection and preservation of species in their

natural habitats. In India, there are currently 489 wildlife sanctuaries, which represent approximately 3.56% of the country's land area. The National Board must grant approval for activities such as building lodges, arranging safari trips, and establishing hotels, as stated in the 2002 amendment.

The process of creating a wildlife sanctuary is comparable to that of designating a national park. The Chief Wildlife Warden (subdivision 33) is in charge of overseeing these sanctuaries. In India, there are around 28 tiger reserves within all the wildlife sanctuaries. These reserves primarily concentrate on protecting and preserving the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelams, making them dedicated to this specific species.

Some sanctuaries, such as the Vedanthangal Bird Sanctuary in Tamil Nadu, have a specific focus on bird conservation. When a land or country is officially declared as a Wildlife Sanctuary (WS), it becomes subject to certain limitations and regulations outlined in Sections 27, 29, 30, 31, and 32.

BIOSPHERE RESERVES

The establishment of BIOSPHERE RESERVES took place in 1973-74 through UNESCO's Man and Biosphere programme (MAB). This program aims to achieve a balance between resource usage and preservation. Its primary goals include conducting research and promoting scientific understanding in today's world.

As of 25th October, 2007 (Table 3), there are more than 14 Biosphere Reserves in India. These reserves are expansive areas of natural landscapes, which can be terrestrial, marine, or a combination of both. They serve as excellent examples to exhibit the existing harmony between humans and nature. The reserves play a crucial role in conserving habitats and species, while also contributing to economic development.

These biosphere militias have unique characteristics, as they are in excellent condition. They fall into Category V of the

IUCN categorization. In India, the National Biosphere Reserve Programme was established in 1986. The main criteria for designating a biosphere reserve is that the area should contain rare and endangered plant and animal species. It should be a protected area and also a bio-geographical unit that is extensive. These ecosystems serve as valuable research models and provide educational information. A biosphere reserve has a hierarchical structure, consisting of three important zones:

1. Core zone
2. Buffer zone
3. Transition zone

The core zone specifically focuses on preserving and conserving the target species.

The Buffer zone, located between the nucleus and passage zone, serves as a protected area. It permits specific human activities like recreation, education, tourism, and restoration endeavors. Nonetheless, these activities must have minimal impact on the environment. The outermost zone is referred to as the Transition zone.

In this zone, all activities related to preservation and disposal are conducted in harmony. There are no restrictions on human activities in this zone. Additionally, this zone generates significant economic revenue from tourism and management practices. The biosphere reserves are established according to the legal frameworks specified in the WPA, 1972 legislation. The declaration process of an area as a biosphere reserve involves responsibilities for both the central and state governments. While financial support is provided by the central government, the state government is responsible for management and administration.

The Indian National Man and Biosphere commission is established by the government to identify and approve new sites, commissions, policies, programmes, and other activities for the enhancement of the reserve. In November 2001,

the ministry suggested certain areas to be included in the World Network of Biosphere Reserves and the International Coordinating Council (ICC) of Man and Biosphere programme of UNESCO designated and approved Sunderbans (West Bengal) and the Gulf of Mannar (Tamil Nadu) into the global network. The Nilgiri was already added in 2000.

Implementation of the provisions stated in WLPA,1972

The CEL - WWF India was established in 1993 and has actively pursued legal actions within the country.

They have engaged in legal battles to protect and preserve wildlife and the environment. Their main involvement stemmed from incidents in Bhitarkanika, Narayan Sarovar, and Delhi ridge. Their research revealed that the provisions of the WLPA, 1972 were not being enforced. CEL - WWF filed a civil writ petition in May, 1995 in the Supreme Court to protect and develop protected areas and wildlife. The Supreme Court accepted the petition and sent notices to every State Government and the Union of India in February, 1997. Throughout the case, the Supreme Court has issued multiple contempt notices to state and union officials to fulfill their duties with integrity and comply with the court's orders.

The Indian board of wildlife (IBWL) was directed in March 1997 to summarize and report on the status of protected areas in India and their progress since strict monitoring orders were issued by the Supreme Court (SC). The states were requested to submit a report on their activities and measures taken to improve these protected areas. The SC also observed that some states had appointed a Wildlife Warden (WW) for certain areas, while others had not. In reply, the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) mentioned that the previous

IBWL meeting had been neglected for the past eight years.

This showed a lack of responsibility both nationally and at the highest level of authority. The board underwent restructuring in 1996, with the Prime Minister appointed as Chairman. However, at the provincial level, the provinces failed to comply with court orders and were not sufficiently vigilant in submitting their responses. Despite this negligence occurring at the provincial level, the Supreme Court allowed an extension for filing the report and granted them an extra two months to submit their replies.

Finally, the Supreme Court accepted that all the States and Unions of India had established their wildlife consultative boards and confirmed their structure, which took place in January 1998. One of the main concerns regarding implementation was the existing tiger population in India. As a result, the court ordered to conduct a survey on the population of these felines.

According to a study submitted by the MoEF, the population of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelams has not declined since 1973. However, the overall decrease in population is a result of the fragmentation of tiger habitats.

DE - Reservation OF PROTECTED AREAS

Certain sanctuaries are at risk of losing their protected status due to actions taken by the state. The Wildlife Protection Act (WLPA), 1972 allows the state wildlife consultative board (state board) to remove the protection provided by the act if it is deemed unnecessary. However, a court order has directed the state authorities to submit a proposal for denotification or de-reservation of an area to the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) for review and approval by the Legislative Assembly.

According to the 2002 amendment of WLPA, the NBWL is authorized to

modify PAs within the legislature. Some cases have already occurred, such as in 1994 when the Boriavli National Park was reduced to prevent eviction of the slum dwellers nearby. However, a tiger reserve cannot be de-notified by a state board. Nevertheless, a tiger reserve can be de-reserved with the approval of the TCA and the National Board for Wildlife.

The Forest Conservation Act, 1970 (FCA) greatly restricts the power of the state to de-reserve forest lands. As per a Supreme Court order dated 13.11.2000, prior permission is required for the conversion or de-reservation of forest land in national parks.

State LEVEL RESPONSES ON PROTECTED AREAS - Tamil Nadu

In Tamil Nadu, the state board was established on 14.09.1995 and reconstituted on 24.02.1997. The state appointed 10 Wildlife Wardens to oversee the implementation of the Wildlife Protection Act (WLPA). Tamil Nadu was one of the few states that correctly interpreted the Supreme Court orders.

According to the province of Tamil Nadu, they have informed the Supreme Court that there are 6 WW and a Deputy Director for the Project Tiger. Additionally, a territory officer has been appointed to ensure proper execution of the WLPA in various national parks and wildlife sanctuaries. The Honorary Wildlife Wardens (HWW) are also appointed for the National Parks and Sanctuaries, serving a term of 3 years. If an appointed individual wishes to leave before the completion of their term, a notice of 3 months must be given prior to resignation or cancellation of assignment.

Many of the protected countries have been notified under subdivision 16 of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882. These countries, which were proclaimed and notified under the Act, will have a position

equivalent to those that have been notified under subdivision 26A or 21 of the WLPA, 1972. Certain sanctuaries and national parks fall under non-reserved forest countries, which are proclaimed under subdivision 21 of the WLPA. An order dated 20.03.1998 stated the immunization of all wildlife in NPs/WSs in every province. The province manager of animal farming was authorized to carry out the instructions at the territorial level.

The District Forest Officers were given instructions to administer vaccinations to all wildlife within a 5 kilometer radius of Protected Areas. A separate order issued on 20.03.1998 mandated the registration of weapons and issuance of licenses. The State Director General of Police was instructed to ensure compliance with this order. Additionally, the wildlife protection ( Tamil Nadu ) Rules, 1975 were established.

Rule 33 pertains to the registration of weapons in NP/WS areas. The DGPs and CWLWs are responsible for addressing any non-compliance. Tamil Nadu has a total of 5 NP and 8 WS, as well as 12 BS, 4 Elephant militias, 3 Tiger Reserves, and 3 Biosphere Reserves (Table 3) that fall under UNESCO's MAB program. Approximately one-sixth of Tamil Nadu is forested. The state is ranked 11th in terms of total forest coverage among Indian states and Union Territories, and it is ranked 13th in terms of recorded forest coverage.

Tamil Nadu is ranked 14th in terms of protected areas, highlighting its diverse flora and fauna that need to be carefully preserved and managed. The province's forests and wilderness truly define its identity. The tiger population in Tamil Nadu has increased according to the 2008 census, thanks to strict measures implemented by the provincial government. Significant investments have been

made in development, preservation, and management activities, yielding successful results.

THE SARISKA CASE: TARUN BHARATH SANGH, ALWAR Vs UNION OF INDIA

Tarun Bharath Sangh, a non-governmental organization (NGO), focused on rural development in Rajasthan. Their main concern was the availability of water resources. Illegal excavation activities in the Alwar region of Rajasthan were causing a water shortage. In response, the organization initiated the Sariska Case.

The Sariska Tiger Sanctuary, formerly known as a country under examination, is now a designated Tiger Reserve and is exclusively used for hunting by the rulers of the Quondam, Alwar province. An NGO approached a tribunal to request that the illegal excavation activity in the Alwar territory of Rajasthan be stopped to protect the environment and preserve nature. They highlighted that the excavation was taking place in a protected area declared by the government. This area has been declared as a tiger reserve under the Rajasthan Wild Animal and Birds Protection Act, 1951. It is also designated as a wildlife sanctuary and national park under the WLPA, 1972.

Under these Acts, it is prohibited to engage in activities related to WS, NP, or tiger reserves, and violations can lead to serious consequences. The granting of permission by the government for such activities contradicted these laws. The petitioner argued that the mining lease was not granted to the company. In order for such an activity to be conducted, prior permission must be obtained from the Government of India - Section 2 FCA,1980 and Rule 4 (6) of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules. They claimed that no permission was obtained and that the government illegally issued 400 mining lease permits. This has resulted in ecological

degradation and environmental devastation.

The tribunal was asked to ensure that environmental protection laws were enforced. The province argued that confusion regarding the distinction between NP and reserved forests, as well as uncertainty about mining locations, led to the granting of excavation activities. However, the province acknowledged that the mines were indeed in protected areas and recognized the need for appropriate action to enforce the laws. Ironically, while claiming to protect the environment, the Rajasthan province is participating in a large-scale fraud and allowing environmental degradation. The central government stated that FCA provisions apply to reserved and protected forests, as well as all areas designated as forests in government records. They also argued that no mining should be allowed without prior permission from the central government.

The cardinal authorities issued a ban on excavation in the Sariska NP, Sariska WS and other protected areas on 7 May, 1997, in accordance with subdivision 3 of the EPA. The Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1982, Rule 4 (6) states that no mining lease can be granted within a forest without following the regulations and provisions of the FCA, 1980. Shri. Justice M.L. Jain, chairman of the commission, recommended the closure of 215 mines mentioned in appendix A, which are located exclusively in protected areas. The purposes of the FCA and EPA are completely different.

The closure of the mines located in the protected woods may be beneficial for the environment but will also benefit the forest. The government has stated that the mines in the protected woods were not given permission. After a final hearing, the court ordered the listed mines to immediately stop their activities and issued notice to

them. However, the mines outside the tiger reserve were allowed to continue their operations for 4 months. During this time, they can submit an application to the government to seek permission to continue their activities. If permission is granted, they can continue mining without any obstacles. If they do not obtain permission, they must stop their mining operations immediately.

Some miners who believed they were treated unfairly submitted a reconsideration request, which was denied by the Supreme Court on 7 May 1994. This case exemplifies the conflict between industry and protected areas.

Decision

The beauty of nature cannot be matched by anything. There is nothing that surpasses it. When God initially created the Earth, he envisioned the presence of nature and its carefree children, unconcerned about the future. Unfortunately, this idyllic vision painted by God was not the reality.

The turbulence has been primarily caused by man. Protected countries play a vital role in the restoration process of the environment. These areas safeguard and restore the environment, including its plant and animal life. Protected countries are crucial for preserving unique biodiversity.

India boasts a rich variety of zoology and vegetation, but even the tiniest creatures are currently facing the threat of extinction. Preserving natural areas is vital for their protection, as these areas serve as crucial habitats that can be conserved through either a species-focused approach or an ecosystem-focused approach.

These areas provide wildlife with safety, allowing them to rebuild and be protected from cruelty inflicted by humans. They also indirectly safeguard humans by preserving the delicate balance of nature and supporting the little creatures that inhabit our planet. These regions are an essential part of the local community's life. The

Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 was passed to ensure the welfare of wildlife, but unfortunately, the provisions of this act were not fully enforced until recently. The State Board and the National Board were ineffective in their response until the Supreme Court stepped in.

This legislative act should be reviewed and modified in various aspects. Specifically, a separate section should be included in the WLPA focusing on implementing the provisions and instructions. Such implementation should be obligatory. Furthermore, authorities responsible for enforcement should face penalties in cases where rules and regulations have been violated.

Despite regulations limiting the entry of individuals and weapons into these countries, anything can be accomplished if someone offers money. This includes violating wildlife laws. The main reason for this is that the foundation of the entire system is so weak that nothing can be accomplished. Unless we acknowledge this and rebuild the system from its very core, the future is bleak and highly predictable. This can be observed in the case of Tarun Bharath Sangh, Alwar Vs Union of India, 1992.

The authorities themselves are allowing illegal excavation operations in a protected wood, which makes them scoundrels. Disregarding wildlife laws has had serious consequences, such as the extinction of Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelams from the Sariska Tiger Reserve. In December 2004, all Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelams disappeared from the Sariska Tiger Reserve. Project Tiger was established in 1973 to preserve tigers.

The creation and sending of shockwaves across the country led to the establishment of the Tiger Task Force, which was specifically formed to protect tigers. Investigation showed that poaching was the main cause for the declining population of Liberation

Tigers of Tamil Eelams, with the last six tigers being poached in late 2004. Following this devastating news, wardens are now ordered to shoot poachers as soon as they are spotted. The Tiger (Panthera Tigris) is our national animal.

The narrative we are experiencing is a heart-wrenching one, as the danger we face struggles desperately to survive amidst the harsh realities of the world. Alongside our national animal, there are other wildlife species such as lions, Asian elephants, and snow leopards. Despite efforts to protect and preserve them through designated areas or reserves, they still remain at risk from poaching. Additionally, there are other factors that impact conservation efforts, such as the failure of local communities or forest inhabitants to assist in wildlife conservation.

They assist the poachers in killing animals, claiming that their presence is a threat. As a result, there is a hostile relationship between the authorities and the local population. However, the locals' actions can be attributed to their reliance on extracting resources from the forest reserve. The legislation protecting the rights of people living near forests and reserves has been in place for quite some time, but many cases are still unresolved. Many individuals remain hopeful about obtaining their rights, allowing them to peacefully coexist with nature. This situation serves as a prime example of the ongoing conflict between humans and the wild.

These struggles have been present for ages but have increased over the old ages because humans expand their metropoliss or towns with mention to development. This has resulted in us working their home ground. Other grounds that can lead to endangering the wildlife in their protected residence is illegal activities such

as excavation, building, noise etc. Protected areas along with its varied flora and fauna really conserve the value of the state. Even though these areas are protected, half the population of the state are not cognizant that an Act has been implemented for protection.

People are not aware of the impacts and legal regulations regarding the environment as stated in the constitution. This lack of knowledge is primarily caused by ignorance and illiteracy. Therefore, it is important to create awareness and educate people. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) emphasizes that a single act of kindness can have a profound impact on many lives. It stresses the interconnection between the environment and the world, highlighting that every living organism has a specific place and role in the food chain or food web. Therefore, even a small disruption in one level can have detrimental effects on the entire web, leading to disasters that humans fail to comprehend.

Therefore, if he wishes to increase the population, he must carefully consider his actions before taking a significant step. However, this does not mean that progress should come to a halt. Progress can still occur, but not at the expense of the environment. Man should not cause harm to nature with his actions.

Recently, there has been a growing movement against the cruelty towards animals, but the collective response is still inadequate considering India's large population. Humans, being greedy creatures, have always wanted more and, in the pursuit of development, have harmed the environment. Unfortunately, by the time they realize their mistakes, it will be too late to reverse their actions and start afresh.

He is already teetering on the edge of

a precipice, one wrong move and he will fall without a trace. Despite being the most intelligent creature, ironically, the adult male is engaging in the most foolish behavior of his lifetime. What does life mean without any moral principles and values? Are we so heartless that we ignore the cries of these living beings when they are being killed? Do we turn a deaf ear to their pleas for help? Instead of assisting them, we exploit them for our own gain. This is what life has become - we advance our own race by stepping on the lives of others.