Take-off

The state's industrialisation drive has been detrimental for agricultural growth on the whole. But it has not always harmed farmers. In some cases, land has been acquired below the market price, in others, market-driven transactions have been embraced by farmers, presumably because they have benefited, if only in the short term.

But the forced, cheap acquisitions stand out. "The actual cost of agricultural land in the terai is Rs 25 lakh per hectare at the minimum and goes up to Rs 125 lakh," says a farmer at Bajpur in Udham Singh Nagar. The price shoots up near Kundeshwari and at Rudrapur, both industrial hubs, to Rs 250 lakh per ha. But real estate speculators and land sharks don't pay anywhere near the higher end of market rates. Under provisions of the new policy, land prices in these areas have been pegged at Rs 70 lakh per ha. The Pant Nagar University authorities, for instance, have given prime land to the Tatas for much less."Surprisingly, this land was given on lease to the Tatas for 90 years, at Rs 12.5 lakh per ha," says a sidcul employee, on condition of anonymity. Some 350 factories in the Rudrapur-Pantnagar industrial estate have also been leased out land at remarkably low prices. The Tatas have got 394.97 ha in this belt. Bajaj, Nestle and Dabur were given leases at rates varying between Rs 56 lakh and Rs 70 lakh per ha (see table Grabbed).

"Terai lands are some of the most fertile not only in the state but in the country. And in less than three years, nearly 2,225 ha of land have been occupied in the terai by industrial giants," says Rajiv Lochan Shah, a social activist based in Uttaranchal. About 1,350 ha of productive farm land in Pant Nagar, 475 ha in Sitarganj and 345 ha in Kashipur have been acquired in this way," says Rupesh Kumar Singh of The Sunday Post, a weekly published from Haldwani. sidcul has converted a total of around 2,170 ha of productive agricultural land into industrial estates.

In Kashipur, the land that was being acquired was actually under cultivation. In Bajpur, too, sidcul was trying to acquire land under the plough, provoking fierce resistance, especially because promises of employment were not kept. "These lands are even better than those of Punjab and Haryana. Instead of using these lands for agriculture, the government is selling them off to industrial estates," says Rajiv Lochan Shah. "The state does not seem to learn from its neighbours. Uttar Pradesh, of which it was a part, has never allotted good agricultural land to industrial estates so mindlessly," says Rawat.

Losing livelihoods
If official pronouncements are to be taken seriously, the loss of land will be compensated by the generation of employment opportunities. The state industrial policy lays a high rhetorical priority on improving standards of living and providing employment to all under a 10-year scheme. The problem is that local people are not getting jobs in the new factories. "According to an employment office at Rudrapur, in the last two years only 136 local people have been employed in the new industries (see table Job crunch)," says Rajiv Lochan Shah.

In many cases, land is obtained with false assurances of employment. Villagers of Kashipur were conned in this way when the India Glycols factory bought land from them. Today, the factory employs 579 people. Of the 244 executives and 64 trainees and apprentices none are from the area. Of the junior staff (271) only 30 per cent are local people. "Fissiparous tendencies cannot be ruled out in the near future if such a system persists," warns Rawat.

More than land
In the headlong rush towards industrialisation, environmental concerns are also being brushed under the carpet. "Nearly 24,000 trees have been felled for the extension of an industrial area to entrepreneurs in Sitarganj," says Keval Krishna Dhal, a social activist based at Sitarganj. "The forests of Barakoli range near Sitarganj and Kalapani khatta near Chorgallia in Nainital district have now been earmarked as the next target to be felled by industrial encroachers." The impact of industrial growth has clearly not been factored in. "Effect of pollution generated by these industries on environment and on the agricultural fields/crops in areas surrounding the estates has not been considered," says Rajiv Lochan Shah. "When the state government has got no control over polluting units at present, how will pollution from so many big industries be tackled?" he asks. There have been reports of several paper, sugar and distillery units polluting air, water, and land in the terai (see 'No respite', Down To Earth, November 15, 2006).

RELATED ARTICLES • Uttaranchal's growth push discounts long-term concerns [Nov. 30, 2006]

Industries under sidcul in the Sampurnanand Jail area near Chorgallia are sited on flood-prone land on the banks of the Nandaur river. This river has a small course down the mountains and has a notorious history of flash floods. "A rush of water and sediments can pose a big risk to these cluster of industries," says Govind Lal Shah, professor, department of geography, Kumaon University.

Skimming the soil
It's not just a question of land acquisition or deforestation. One of the fallouts of industrialisation is environmental degradation through topsoil quarrying to serve construction needs in industrial estates. There is a caveat though. Farmers are actively involved in this enterprise because they make decent money through it.

Vast tracts of fertile agricultural land in Dineshpur, Kalinagar, Transit Camp, Ramnagar, Matkota, Kichha, Gadarpur, Chakki More, and Sitarganj of Udham Singh Nagar have been transformed into soil quarries. In Sitarganj, a number of villages -- Bangaria, Sadhu Nagar, Sant Puram, Nakulia -- have become centres of quarrying. Soil is removed up to a depth of three metres, with hundreds of trucks transporting it to estates through the day and even at night.

At present, the Tharu and Buksar tribes, who have owned land here since the 13^th century according to local lore, were earning as much as Rs 4 lakh for every ha/metre of land brought under mining. "I have earned Rs 8,000 for selling the topsoil from one bigha (0.25 ha) of land. This is more than what I would have earned from farming," says Govind Bisht of Nakulia village. More and more farmers are selling fertile soil. The price of soil has shot up to Rs 8-16 lakh per ha/metre and farmers are earning fortunes.

All this is in violation of the 1971 Land Act, an extension of the 1950 Uttar Pradesh zamindari abolition act, which prohibits excavation, mining or selling of farmland in the terai. But, in a way, that is a small violation. The state's land reform act of 2003 prohibits leasing or sale of farmland to private entrepreneurs from outside the state in the first place -- that's obviously not being followed.

While the short-term returns are good for the farmers, in the long run the land and its people are bound to suffer. "Only about an inch of soil is formed every 500 to 1,000 years. Any loss of good topsoil is a serious concern since the removal of topsoil reduces the fertility of the land by as much as 50 per cent," says Raghubir Chand, professor, department of geography, Kumaon University. "Additional soil for construction in industrial areas should be taken from a place where it does not damage the local ecology. Soil must come from non-agricultural and barren land. Agricultural land should not be touched."

RELATED ARTICLES • Uttaranchal's growth push discounts long-term concerns [Nov. 30, 2006]

In the well-known Panchatantra story, a monkey wanting to cross the mighty Ganga befriends a crocodile. But a while into their friendship, the reptile’s intentions turn sinister he and his wife want the monkey for lunch. The simian senses this and tricks the crocodile to get to safety. The story concludes with the monkey addressing his former friend from the safety of a tree “I couldn’t have antagonised you when we were in the river. So, I had little option but to trick you when your intentions became clear.” Besides showing the monkey’s guile, the story alludes to a significant ecological fact crocodiles are top predators of river systems. Versions of the fable are aplenty. Ancient and medieval Indian literature has references to the uneasy relations between humans and the reptile

Cover story special package What is a gharial? Tears for the crocodile Life in captivity Pyrrhic victory The Loophole Where to live? Lost manhood Bad numbers Where to croc? Pacific example

people dependent on rivers couldn’t afford to antogonise the top predator of the water bodies. Accounts of 18th and 19th European travellers to India also carry references to the crocodile.

One of the species mentioned is the gharial— Gavialias gangeticus, a thin-snouted variety found in the Ganga, Mahanadi and Brahmaputra river systems. Named after a pot-like bump (ghara or a pot in many Indian languages), this species is threatened—like other crocodile varieties. Not much has changed for the people dependent on the rivers the only difference is that they don’t feel threatened by the reptiles; they are threatened by conservationists who alienate them from their livelihoods ostensibly to protect the gharial.

But sadly today, the top predator of river systems does not get much press even while its counterpart in forests, the tiger, hogs the headlines. “Scant attention is paid to species other than mammalian mega-fauna like the tiger, elephant and rhino,” rues Rom Whitaker, a crocodile expert associated with the Madras Crocodile Bank Trust, Mamallapuram, Tamil Nadu. Warnings of Whitaker and other experts did lead to the Crocodile Project in 1975. And in 1982, the un’s Food and Agriculture Organization (fao)— one of the project’s funders— proclaimed the project a great success.

But, says Whitaker, “ the situation has reversed and gharials are in serious trouble again. There are less than 200 adult specimens in the wild”.

kirtiman awasthi follows the missed turnings of crocodile conservation

Despite a much-vaunted conservation project, there are less than 200 adult gharials left in the wild -- they are 20 times more endangered than tigers

Points to basic flaws in India's conservation programme

New Delhi, December 7, 2006 India's gharials are in serious trouble. There are fewer than 200 of these river predators left in the wild. And their deplorable state has remained ignored even by the media, while the tiger hogs the headline -- but the truth is that gharials are 20 times more endangered than tigers.

These facts have been brought to light by a report in Down To Earth, the science and environment fortnightly, which the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) helps publish.

India initiated its crocodile conservation programme (Project Crocodile) in 1975. And in 1982, writes the magazine, the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization, one of the project's funders, lauded it as one of the most successful conservation programmes in the world. As a result, in 1991, the Union ministry of environment and forests, believing that the project had served its purpose, withdrew the funds for the captive breeding and egg collection programmes.

Only two surveys on gharial numbers have been done since then. And between these two surveys, the population of gharials has plummeted. In 2003, a mere 514 gharials were reported in the country -- almost a 60 per cent drop from the 1,200 found in a 1998 survey. Experts point out that the conservation programme suffered from a lack of information on gharials numbers, and hence, absence of remedial action.

The programme suffered from more than that, says the magazine. A 1983 notification under the Wildlife Protection Act, which placed the gharial in Schedule 1, brought the conservation programme into conflict with livelihoods. Trade in crocodile products (skin and eggs) was banned. Local communities, already smarting after their traditional fishing grounds were taken away to make way for gharial conservation, were incensed. They readily took to lucrative (and illegal) sand mining in regions where the gharial bred -- destroying the work of years.

The ecosystem approach to conservation, according to Down To Earth, instead of a species-oriented approach, is the only answer. The aim should be to consider the entire watershed as one ecosystem, give weightage to all biological resources within that watershed -- and factor the local communities' needs in this entire programme.

For more details, please contact
Souparno Banerjee
Email souparno@cseindia.org  or

Kirtiman Awasthi
Email kirtiman@cseindia.org

Phone 011-29955124, 29955125 or 29956399

To download the press release or to read the Down To Earth report, please visit
http//www.cseindia.org

Cover story special package

Croc can't go on | Tears for the crocodile | Pyrrhic victory | Where to live? | Lost manhood | Where to croc?

In 1970, a paper in Indian Forester by a group of scientists of the Zoological Survey of India, led by its resident reptile specialist, S Biswas, rang alarm bells. The scientists had surveyed the Kosi river in Bihar - among the gharial's habitats in the country -- and found that the crocodiles were poached rampantly, killed for their skin or even trapped inadvertently in fishing nets. Shifting of the Kosi's course and artificial embankments also contributed to the decline in the reptile's population. Besides, monsoon waters kept flushing gharials down to uninhabitable places every year.

In 1974, another survey by Whitaker, confirmed all the worst years. That year the gharials numbered less than 200 in the wild. Exact figures aren't available, but conservationists estimate that in the 1940s, the Indian subcontintent had between 5,000 and 10,000 gharials. The sharp fall called for desparate measures.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species had come into effect by then. It recommended a ban on the killing of all crocodile species, and their translocation to protected areas (pas).

The Indian government took up this recommendation in good earnest. The gharial was accorded protection under the Wildlife Protection Act (wpa), 1972. Project Crocodile was started in 1975 with the aid of the United Nations Development Programme and fao. Stretches of the Mahanadi, Ganga, Girwa and other rivers inhabited by gharials were declared pas. The project included an intensive captive breeding and rearing programme (see box Life in captivity) to create a large crocodile population that would be ultimately translocated to these pas. An acute shortage of gharial eggs was overcome by their purchase from Nepal, each egg costing Rs 200. A male gharial was flown in from a zoo in Frankfurt, West Germany, to get the breeding programme going.



Sixteen crocodile rehabilitation centres and five crocodile sanctuaries -- National Chambal Sanctuary (ncs), Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary (kws), Satkosia Gorge Wildlife Sanctuary, Son Gharial Sanctuary and Ken Gharial Sanctuary -- were established between 1975 and 1982.

Eight hundred and seventy-nine gharials, 190 estuarine crocodiles, and 493 muggers were released in the wild in that period. A Crocodile Breeding and Management Training Institute was set up in Madras in 1980 to train managers of crocodile stations. By 1991, 12,000 gharial eggs were collected from wild and captive breeding nests, and over 5,000 gharial reared to about a metre or more in length and released in the wild. Over 3,500 of these were released in ncs, the biggest gharial reserve in the country sprawling across 425 km in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.

The programme was hailed the world over as a conservation model and that sealed the fate of the gharial.

<Previous                Next>

Cover story special package

Croc can't go on | Tears for the crocodile | Pyrrhic victory | Where to live? | Lost manhood | Where to croc?

In 1982 a report by Antoon de Vos, a wildlife biologist, for the fao/undp pronounced Project Crocodile as one of the most successful conservation projects in the world. And in 1991, the Union ministry of environment and forests felt that the project had served its purpose, and stopped funds for its captive breeding programme. Funds were also withdrawn for the egg collection programme. The thousands of crocodiles seen in various rearing stations and captive breeding centres were testimony enough for success.

Others, however, were not that optimistic. The real litmus test for the project lay in increased sighting of the reptile in its natural habitats, they argued. And that was fraught terrain.

Bad census
De Vos had suggested stepping up the monitoring of released gharial to determine the continued effectiveness of Project Crocodile.In 1997-1998, monitoring exercises by the forest departments of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh located over 1,200 gharials and over 75 nests in ncs. But no survey was carried out between 1999 and 2003. And the 2003 survey showed catastophic results. Gharial numbers (including adults, subadults and juveniles) had plummetted to 514 -- a near 60 per cent decline from the status in 1998.

Experts immediately cast a doubt on the monitoring exercises. "Carrying out census surveys of endangered species like the gharial should be a routine function of wildlife departments. But scant attention is paid to species other than mammalian mega-fauna like the tiger, elephant and rhino," says Whitaker. H R Bustard, eminent reptile biologist and fao consultant to Project Crocodile, agrees. "It was lack of quantitative information on its status, and hence absence of any remedial action, that had brought the gharial to the verge of extinction in 1974," he says.

Crocs antagonise people
"In 2002, there were 302 adult gharials in India and Nepal. Their numbers have fallen to 145 in 2006," says Whitaker. What happened to the thousands of gharials that were bred and released in the wild? Whitaker says that conservation strategies conflicted with livelihood needs of local people. Designating large tracts of rivers as inviolate meant keeping local communities away from what used to be fishing grounds. Besides, gharial skin was an item of trade and the crocodile's eggs was food to many before wpa came into force. A lot of people felt shortcharged by the act.

Bustard had anticipated such trouble. To address this problem, Project Crocodile had suggested selective culling of crocodiles that would produce substantial revenue for local people. The project actually had provisions for people's participation. It had called for protecting the immediate and long-term interests of fisherfolk who live along pas by providing them an alternative source of income. Most importantly, it mandated commercial crocodile farming, so that people could earn from conserving crocodiles and their habitats.

The 1983 notification under wpa, however, closed all doors to this approach. Since the gharial was placed under schedule 1 of the act, all trade in crocodile skin was prohibited.

Crushed by tractors
In ncs, India's largest gharial protection reserve, officials are learning belatedly the pitfalls of conservation sans local participation. The sanctuary has been dogged by sand mining in recent times.

This activity provides livelihoods to many, especially after droughts in the last four years have made agriculture unviable in the region around ncs. Sand mining has official sanction in village Piprai in Madhya Pradesh's Morena district (see box A loophole). The district administration gives contracts for sand mining amounting to around Rs 8 crore every year. But operations have spread to 50 other villages, illegally. Forest officers in Morena, say on condition of anonymity that the annual turnover from illicit sand mining is more than Rs 20 crore and involves powerful mafias.

A loophole When the National Chambal Sanctuary was re-notified in 1983 (originally notified in 1979) to include a kilometre on either side of the river, one village, Piprai, falling in this range was left out. Divisional forest officer, Morena, M K Sharma says, “This was due to a mistake in mapping.” The revenue department of the district seized its opportunity and leased out land of about 108 hectare for sand mining. Since 2001, a case filed by Madhya Pradesh’s forest department to include Piprai village in the protected area has been pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Gwalior bench.

The operations begin in November/December and continue till the monsoons starts, usually in June/July next year. Gharials lay eggs in March/April and many of them are crushed underneath the miners' tractors. And it is monsoon time when the eggs hatch many a hapless juvenile is swept away by floodwaters.

Villagers operate about 500 tractors in the 50 villages that are the centre of sand mining. Those who don't have a cut in this line have their own avenues of making money. "We charge Rs 10 from each tractor that passes through our agricultural fields," says Sultan Singh, a resident of Barbasin village in Morena district. It's another matter that fields of people like him have no crops. The sandminers' tractors help them keep a pretence of ploughing and at the same time brings precious cash during times of drought.

Experts and even wildlife officials reason that matters could have been different had Chambal been declared a pa after giving due consideration to local people's needs. They say that the authorities could have done well to have adhered to the Guidelines for Wetland Management notified by Union government in 1992. The document offers a good roadmap for wetland conservation, with support of local people. Many also accept that given drought conditions, people have no option but to turn to sand mining.

Officials in ncs are today examining whether sand mining can be done sustainably. The pa administration also has a 10-year management plan (2003-2013) for the sanctuary. However, they say that insufficient staff makes it difficult for them to counter armed anti-social elements. Coordination between officials in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh is also a problem.

The management plan aims to increase the number of gharials in the sanctuary to 1,000. There is also a proposal to relocate villagers within 1 km of the sanctuary. This has incensed villagers. Janak Singh of Khandoli village in Morena district, for example, says, "We will have to give away almost all our land if this proposal is ratified. Why should we sacrifice our land for gharials." The forest department, however, disclaims that any move to relocate people is doing the rounds.

<previous                Next>

Cover story special package

Croc can't go on | Tears for the crocodile | Pyrrhic victory | Where to live? | Lost manhood | Where to croc?

Once released in the wild, many crocodiles are swept away by floods. Many stray into unprotected areas and get trapped in fishing nets protected area has been pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s Gwalior bench.

Sand mining is not the only threat to the gharial. The creature has a hard time surviving in their strictly riverine habitats when heavy rains floods rivers. Many are flushed down into shallow, inhospitable stretches outside pas. "The linear, riverine habitat of the gharial is particularly disadvantageous for the newly hatched gharials," says B C Choudhary, a zoologist with the Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun.

Take, for example, the situation in the Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary in Orissa. Seven hundred 'head-started' gharial (young animals reared till the length of 120 cm) were released into the sanctuary since 1978. At present, there are only two of them left.

Experts say that this happened even when use of fishing nets have been effectively stopped, bamboo rafting (which disturbed basking and nesting females) discontinued, and the sanctuary, on the whole, well managed. They ascribe the project's failure to fluctuations in the water level of the Mahanadi. Every year during the monsoon, reservoirs on the Hirakud dam swell and water is released downstream before it reaches the danger level, deluding the gharials.

"Though not studied extensively, fluctuations in water level tend to induce migration in fish, an important prey for gharials," says D Basu, a key gharial researcher with Uttar Pradesh's forest department.

A barrage

Shrinking space Katerniaghat habitat circumscribed by barrage

In kws, Bahraich district, Uttar Pradesh, the gharial has come up against a barrage. Quite literally. A barrage downstream at the confluence of Girwa and Mohana river has drastically reduced the 400 sq km sanctuary's capacity to accommodate gharials, by regulating water flows in an unfavourable way. Only a 4-km stretch of the Girwa is available as an ideal habitat for gharials.

R K Pandey, divisional forest officer at Bahraich, says there are only five male adults at the sanctuary -- a marginal improvement compared to 1970 when only two gharials and three eggs were found in the Girwa. He also says that the reptiles face threats from fishing downstream. "Gharials are strangled to death when they are accidentally snapped up in fishing nets." Harry V Andrews, crocodile expert and director of Madras Crocodile Bank Trust, says that there are 47 gharials (35 adult females, four males, three sub-adults and five juveniles) along a 5-km stretch of the Girwa. The smaller numbers of male gharials is worries many like him.

<Previous        Next>

Cover story special package

Croc can't go on | Tears for the crocodile | Pyrrhic victory | Where to live? | Lost manhood | Where to croc?

Bad numbers

Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary 58 gharials 28 adult females, 4 adult males, 8 sub-adults and 18 juveniles in 2006

National Chambal Sanctuary 323 gharials 44 yearlings, 154 juveniles, 39 sub-adults, 82 adult females and 4 adult males in 2006

Son Gharial Sanctuary 25 gharials in a 160-km stretch of river in the sanctuary; only two nests (meaning two females) in 30 years

Ken Gharial Sanctuary 10 adult gharials. No adult males observed Satkosia Gorge Wildlife Sanctuary 2 known gharials in 2006, despite about 700 being released since 1980

THE skewed sex ratio is not confined to Katerniaghat (see box Bad numbers). Project Crocodile has been conspicous in giving the cold shoulder to the male gharial. Shrinking and fragmented habitat have increased competition among the males. "The social structure and behaviour of gharials is such that adult males try to push away sub-adults," says Choudhary.

There are other reasons for the lopsided sex ratio. All crocodile species, including gharials, belong to a group of reptiles whose sex is determined by environmental temperatures and not just heritable chromosomes, according to a study by D C Deeming, published in Biological Sciences (Vol 322, No. 1208, December 1, 1988). Embryos need an optimum temperature of 32c to emerge as males, according to Demming.

Lower or higher temperatures mean the embryos turn out to be females.In natural conditions when variations in temperature are much less, there is some balance in the sex ratio. Gharials are endothermic -- they regulate temperatures by external means. They are active at night and relatively inactive during the day. As rivers warm slowly in the morning, gharials bask on sand banks. At night, the river cools slowly, so the gharials remain submerged. Sand mining and fluctuations in water-levels upset this behaviour, affecting breeding habits and, therefore, the sex ratio.

Demming's study indicates that conservation programmes based on egg collection and incubation also upset breeding habits and can hasten the decline of natural populations.

<Previous        Next>

Cover story special package

Croc can't go on | Tears for the crocodile | Pyrrhic victory | Where to live? | Lost manhood | Where to croc?

WILDLIFE officials say the population of wild adult gharials is 180, which is probably an overestimate, with fewer than 20 adult males. Gharials are now 20 times more endangered than tigers, Whitaker says. When news of the drastic decline of the gharial was relayed to the Crocodile Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union some of its members reacted by starting the Gharial Multi-Task Force.

The crocodile is presently categorised as endangered, but conservationists fear that soon they will be critically endangered. "Because of the grave threat to the survival of the gharial it is necessary that we relist it as critically endangered," says Whitaker.

"Apart from a period in the early phases of the Chambal project, when population increases created the false impression in some quarters that its survival had been secured, the status of the gharial will perhaps forever swing between critically endangered and 'conservation dependent'.Any assertion that conservation can ensure the species survival in the wild, in the face of the growing human pressures, is a delusion," is Basu's considered opinion.

"We have bred thousand of gharials in captivity, now it's time to focus on habitat as a whole. Captive breeding and rearing was successful but it was difficult to keep the crocodiles within the confines of a pa," says Pandey. He has a point. Even when they are not swept away by the monsoon deluge, many gharials make their way outside the protected tracts of the rivers. This happens because the current practice is to release gharials in lower reaches of pas instead of releasing them near the sources, the earlier practice that gave the animals room for manouevre without straying out of their protected habitats, Basu says. Once outside, they are vulnerable to fishing nets.

Experts have also linked the decline in gharial populations to a disruption in the food chain in some areas. Increased fishing has made food scarce for predatory fish (of no interest to fisherfolks), reduced their population and affected the gharials who feed on them. Morever, crocodile habitats have come under increasing pressure as forestlands have been cleared for agriculture and industry, and swamps and rivers encroached.

"That is why we need an ecosystem approach to conservation. We can't just look at a single animal, species, or piece of land in isolation from all that is around it," says Choudhary. "Gharial cannot be conserved effectively within the boundaries of a pa, we are not going to restore aquatic resources with just captive breeding centres. We must look on watersheds as one ecosystem," he explains. The ecosystem approach accords significance to all biological resources within a watershed and considers the economic health of communities within that watershed.

Indian authorities would perhaps do well to take a leaf out of the book of their counterparts in Papua New Guinea (see box Pacific example), where people's needs have been factored into the conservation agenda.

Pacific example Swamps and wetlands cover a significant portion of the land area of Papua New Guinea. In many of these areas, crocodiles constitute a significant economic resource. They once faced extinction because of rampant hunting for the leather trade. In the early 1970s, the Papua New Guinea government banned trade in crocodile skins with more than 51 cm belly width, to protect crocodiles of breeding age. But it also started a series of small-scale schemes for rearing crocodiles in captivity, involving a hundred villages. There were teething troubles, however extreme seasonal variations in water levels left the rearing pens flooded during certain parts of the year and too dry in others. The pumps required to maintain a constant water level were beyond the economic means of most villagers. All this made crocodile rearing less profitable than hunting in the wild. To circumvent this, the government started another project in collaboration with FAO/UNDP in 1977. Crocodile-rearing operations were concentrated on medium- and large-scale commercial farms. Small-scale village operations were converted into crocodile collection stations. Villagers were paid a government-set fee to collect young live crocodiles in the wild which were then transported to the rearing stations. Since the government price for the live young crocodiles was higher than that paid by traders, poaching was effectively reduced. This experiment has been emulated in Jayapura, Indonesia. Here, operations are run by a crocodile cooperative, Koperasi Yarui — the local name for the freshwater crocodile. Each village hunter gives 10 per cent of his earnings to the cooperative, which ensures fair prices for the crocodiles and supplies of needed inputs. The money generated has also permitted the building of a school, a medical post and a church.

<Previous