Tweet
Warns of strict action against any sanctuary or national park that allows tourists into core areas
With a view to ensure safe habitat for tigers in their exclusive preserves, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to produce details of all tourism activities taking place in core or critical areas of tiger reserves across the country.
Warning of strict action against any sanctuary or national park that allowed the core area of tiger habitation for tourists, the Court said that such areas are “sacrosanct” and any activity by way of tourism or related business would be interference with the tigers’ natural habitat and breeding space.
Seeking response within three weeks on the above aspects from the Court, the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) and Madhya Pradesh Government, the bench of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Dipak Misra are expected to hear the petition filed by a conservationist Ajay Dubey, on November 11.
Interestingly, the bench has drawn support from an affidavit filed by NTCA that pointed out that under Section 38-V of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, core or critical tiger habitat is defined as areas “established on the basis of scientific and objective criteria, to be kept as inviolate for the purposes of tiger conservation.”
The affidavit, which also forms the response of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, further stated, “In core/critical areas if tourism activities are taking place, they are required to be phased out in the fringe/buffer area.”
Despite this stand of the NTCA, Dubey, who had earlier approached the Madhya Pradesh HC, failed to seek a ban on tourism in core areas of tiger reserves. Against this order of the HC passed on January 19, 2011 Dubey approached the SC through his counsel Siddharth Gupta.
The apex bench, which is now determined to take up the issue on a pan-India level, explained how the core or critical area of tiger habitat could be disturbed. The bench said, “There is no doubt that core areas are safe habitats for wild animals to breed…We want to know if any violation of the sanctity of core area is taking place in any national park or sanctuary.” The Court was of the view that no activity must be permitted in this space of the forest.
But, in its affidavit filed before the apex court, the Madhya Pradesh Government claimed that banning tourism in tiger reserves was counter-productive to conservation of tigers and affected the livelihood of thousands of persons as also the local community which benefitted from tourists visiting the place.
The State claimed that its six tiger reserves were well-managed and in five, core zones have been notified. Opposing the petition, the State submitted, “The contention of the petitioner that there has to be a total ban on all activities in core areas is not sustainable.” At the same time, it added, “Although some impact of tourism on wildlife and its habitat cannot be totally ruled out, but to say that the tourism practiced in the State is ecologically unsustainable is not correct.”
With a view to ensure safe habitat for tigers in their exclusive preserves, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to produce details of all tourism activities taking place in core or critical areas of tiger reserves across the country.
Warning of strict action against any sanctuary or national park that allowed the core area of tiger habitation for tourists, the Court said that such areas are “sacrosanct” and any activity by way of tourism or related business would be interference with the tigers’ natural habitat and breeding space.
Seeking response within three weeks on the above aspects from the Court, the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) and Madhya Pradesh Government, the bench of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Dipak Misra are expected to hear the petition filed by a conservationist Ajay Dubey, on November 11.
Interestingly, the bench has drawn support from an affidavit filed by NTCA that pointed out that under Section 38-V of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, core or critical tiger habitat is defined as areas “established on the basis of scientific and objective criteria, to be kept as inviolate for the purposes of tiger conservation.”
The affidavit, which also forms the response of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, further stated, “In core/critical areas if tourism activities are taking place, they are required to be phased out in the fringe/buffer area.”
Despite this stand of the NTCA, Dubey, who had earlier approached the Madhya Pradesh HC, failed to seek a ban on tourism in core areas of tiger reserves. Against this order of the HC passed on January 19, 2011 Dubey approached the SC through his counsel Siddharth Gupta.
The apex bench, which is now determined to take up the issue on a pan-India level, explained how the core or critical area of tiger habitat could be disturbed. The bench said, “There is no doubt that core areas are safe habitats for wild animals to breed…We want to know if any violation of the sanctity of core area is taking place in any national park or sanctuary.” The Court was of the view that no activity must be permitted in this space of the forest.
But, in its affidavit filed before the apex court, the Madhya Pradesh Government claimed that banning tourism in tiger reserves was counter-productive to conservation of tigers and affected the livelihood of thousands of persons as also the local community which benefitted from tourists visiting the place.
The State claimed that its six tiger reserves were well-managed and in five, core zones have been notified. Opposing the petition, the State submitted, “The contention of the petitioner that there has to be a total ban on all activities in core areas is not sustainable.” At the same time, it added, “Although some impact of tourism on wildlife and its habitat cannot be totally ruled out, but to say that the tourism practiced in the State is ecologically unsustainable is not correct.”
