While conservationists argued that the relocation was necessary to prevent human-wildlife conflict and ensure ecological balance, it came at a significant social and economic cost to the displaced tribal population.  Photographs by Kumar Sambhav Shrivastava/CSE
Governance

Where the Cheetahs now roam, the Sahariya no longer call their home

To create a secure and undisturbed environment for these large carnivores, the Indian government relocated over 24 villages, primarily inhabited by Sahariya families, from within the core sanctuary zone

DTE Staff

The Sahariya tribe, a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG), has lived for generations in the forested regions of Sheopur district, Madhya Pradesh.

Traditionally dependent on forest resources for their livelihood — through hunting, gathering, and small-scale agriculture — the Sahariyas share a deep cultural and spiritual connection with their land.

However, their way of life was significantly disrupted following the establishment of the Kuno-Palpur Wildlife Sanctuary in the 1990s.

The emotional and cultural trauma of being removed from ancestral lands — which were not just homes but held religious and ritual significance — remains an under-acknowledged consequence of conservation-driven displacement.

The sanctuary, covering an area of over 700 square kilometres, was earmarked as a potential site for the reintroduction of the Asiatic lion, a project that has been in planning since the 1980s due to concerns about the vulnerability of the last remaining wild population in Gujarat’s Gir Forest.

More recently, the area has also been selected for India’s ambitious African Cheetah Reintroduction Project, with the first batch of cheetahs arriving from Namibia in 2022.

To create a secure and undisturbed environment for these large carnivores, the Indian government relocated over 24 villages, primarily inhabited by Sahariya families, from within the core sanctuary zone.

While conservationists argued that the relocation was necessary to prevent human-wildlife conflict and ensure ecological balance, it came at a significant social and economic cost to the displaced tribal population.

The resettlement process, which promised compensation, housing, and alternative livelihoods, has faced criticism from human rights groups and local activists.

Many Sahariya families report inadequate support, lack of access to clean water, healthcare, and education in their new settlements. Displacement has also led to the loss of traditional knowledge systems, food insecurity, and growing dependency on government aid.

The resettlement process, which promised compensation, housing, and alternative livelihoods, has faced criticism from human rights groups and local activists.

Furthermore, the emotional and cultural trauma of being removed from ancestral lands — which were not just homes but held religious and ritual significance — remains an under-acknowledged consequence of conservation-driven displacement.