States may get powers to cull wild animals
NEW DELHI: If the Centre has its way, the Wildlife Act will soon be diluted in favour of humans.
The draft proposal to amend the 1972 law attempts to undo some of the most basic tenets of wildlife conservation and protection. If passed, it will allow people to use animals in cultural, traditional practices, not hold farmers responsible for the death of wild animals, and treat hunting as an offence only if there is a distinct involvement of “criminal intent”.
Experts say such an action will have “drastic and dangerous” ramifications on the country’s wildlife.
For the first time, the proposal speaks of allowing “traditional and cultural practices” of communities — a factor that could override SC orders banning animal sports such as Jallikattu (a bull-taming sport) in Tamil Nadu and bull racing in Maharashtra and Punjab. Experts believe the amendment would give legitimacy to practices such as Nag Panchami (where milk is force fed to snakes) and animal sacrifices at religious places.
Through another amendment, the Centre intends to absolve farmers of wildlife deaths caused due to consumption of insecticide and entanglement in electric fences installed to protect crops. “Who will decide whether an animal is poisoned deliberately or accidentally?” asked environmental lawyer Ritwick Dutta.
Another change is the inclusion of the term “criminal intent” in a provision that makes hunting a cognizable offence. Legal experts say this means a person can get 10 years’ imprisonment if the hunter’s intention to kill the animal is proven. Otherwise, he would be booked under softer norms of the law. The Centre also intends to delegate the responsibility of handling instances of humananimal conflict, including culling of animals, to state governments.
A ministry official said the main purpose of the amendment was to enhance the penalty for wildlife crimes. The penalty for poaching would be increased from `500 `5,000, and states would give `10,000 as reward to informers on wildlife crimes.
Wildlife activists aren’t convinced. “The government only wants to create an impression that it is bringing stricter penalties for wildlife crime. In actuality, it wants to provide states with the licence to kill animals,” Dutta said.
The proposed amendment may also weaken the standing committee of the National Board for Wildlife, which has the authority to stall projects from coming up at wildlife parks, turning it into a mere advisory body.