Is the ban on "tiger shows" at Kanha and Bandhavgarh really in interest of the big
A FEW months ago, mornings at the Kanha national park began
with mahouts loping off to scout the area around park headquarters for tiger spoor. After a tiger was spotted and made to
settle in one spot, tourists would be brought in, 4 at a time, for
a "dekho" at the striped felines. The Madhya Pradesh government banned these shows at Kanha and the Bandhavgarh
national park, effective May 14, 1994, with 20-minute jumbo
joyrides to replace them. What is the basis of this decision?
How does it serve the cause of tiger conservation?
At Kanha, where I spent 10 months between 1992 and
1994, park visitors and staff alike are split down the middle
concerning the pros and cons ofthe tiger show. But let us marsball the facts. Tiger tracking within Kanba was restricted to
only 5- 10 sq km. Again, from January to May 1994, only 7
tigers were located. Of these, only I was previously unidentified. This amounts to a minuscule proportion ofthe estimated
park population of tigers. Finally, tiger shows were not held
every day; in 1993-94, mahouts had a 57 per cent success rate
in locating tigers. In sum, the ban is valid iftaken in the interests of tiger conservation as a whole rather than for the welfare
of 6-7 tigers. For this very reason, it must be supported with
sound scientific research.
That is to say, what are the short- and long-term effects of
the shows on tiger behaviour? The former would include
changes in normal movement, hunting, mating and rearing
habits. Long-term effects would be reduced survival and
reproductive potential. And although Kanha's feral "stars"
were arguably the most observed wild tigers in the world, there
has been no systematic analysis of tiger ecology and behaviour
since the shows began in the early '70s. There is no quantitative evidence regarding negative effects, only the anecdo -tal
observations of the mahouts that these are minimal or absent.
They recount - surprise! surprise! - how the tiger Bourra,
his mother and his brother have used the elephants as screens
while stalking prey. When asked about long-term effects, they
may mention Bari Mata, the mother of almost all the tigershow stars, who, at 16 years of age, has successfully reared
8 litters.
There is a theory that habituated tigers may be more susceptible to poaching. This may have been a factor in the
poaching incidents in Ranthambhore in 1991-92. It's a real
risk, but only if the poacher is using a vehicle or an elephant,
where both the human form and smell may get masked.
Another wild assumption is that familiarity with humans will
result in more man-eating tigers. If so, 20 years of tiger shows
should have produced a veritable horde! A tiger whose territory lies partly or wholly outside a park, or 'whose kill has been
stolen by locals, is likelier to turn man-eater these days.
So we are saddled with anecdotes and unproven theories. I
came to Kanha again in December 1993 to record in de:
behaviour and identity of the striped stars. However
permission took so long in coming that the show was b
shortly after I obtained my permit. Neither the state
ment nor the park management evinced interest in ob
behavioural data; which makes you think whether the
was the result ofbureaucratic powergames: Rajesh Gopa.
field director at Kanha, claims that the ban was ordered
Project Tiger steering committee. But Project Tiger
Arin Ghosh says that it was a state government order,
bly to prevent harassment of tigers.
Almost as important as the decision itself is its imp1t
tation. By dropping the ban into the lap of the tourist
with nary a hint, the Madhya Pradesh government has
itself of a massive public relations bloomer. Like it or
tiger is probably why many tourists come to Kanha
warned is less disgruntled.
Perhaps the show was destined to fail, given the ser
taint of a circus act. But the ban typifies a universal go
ment attitude - the "Let's scrap it before we have to do
innovative thinking" approach to wildlife and park
ment. In some cases, park management problems were
ly attributed to the tiger show, such as the crowding
Kanha car park.
Since April 1992, 1 have attended some 45 tiger shows. For
Me,it
is thrilling to find a wild animal trusting enough to actu
in the presence of its mortal enemy. Granted that
mav hanker for the gambol or the snarl, but one can
'ne cats at anything: fighting, feeding, hunting or (why
.eeping. And for all its real and imagined drawbacks, the
greatest gain is.the cathartic value of a tiger sighting: it
power to turn a viewer into a crusader for the species.
In these times of waning tiger populations and poaching at
Inle high in Madhya Pradesh, park managers must
lie costs of potential disturbance to a small proportion
with the benefits of increased vigilance and monitor
Kanha tiger population.
Ecotourism lays conserva
i- the average Indian family's doorstep. Instead of
ng on its supposed negative effects, ecotourism should
-,idered an integral part of the conservation process.
The ban brings to mind the old adage, "Out of sight, out of
The show was convincing proof that tigers are alive
kc fteil in Kariba National Park. We can be dead certain that
pr ins were not amongst those recovered from the town of
ota- Ln early May, 1994. Now, will we ever be so certain of
their fate again?
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.