VZCZCXRO8325
RR RUEHHM RUEHLN RUEHMA RUEHPB RUEHPOD
DE RUEHNE #0614/01 0581053
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 271053Z FEB 08
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0640
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 1629
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 1834
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 2525
RUEHC/DEPT OF INTERIOR WASHDC
RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000614 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR OES/PCI, OES/ETC, OES/ENV, AND SCA/INS 
STATE PASS TO NSF FOR INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS 
INTERIOR FOR FRED BAGLEY AND MINI NAGENDRAN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV IN
SUBJECT:  INDIAN TIGER IN A STATE OF TERMINAL EMERGENCY MADE WORSE 
BY DEPLETING FORESTS 
 
NEW DELHI 00000614  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY. The much awaited Tiger Census Report and the State of 
the Forest Report were released by the Ministry of Environment and 
Forests (MOEF) recently.  Although the Tiger census made headlines 
by officially recognizing the massive decline in the tiger 
population, it did not come as a surprise to most specialists in the 
field.  In the wake of the media outcry following the release, Prime 
Minister Manmohan Singh asked all Chief Ministers to take personal 
charge of tiger conservation and forest management in their States. 
Aside from over-inflated estimates from prior censuses, habitat loss 
and poaching were cited as the two major factors contributing to the 
tiger's decline.  However, equally important is the government's 
development first policies.  END SUMMARY. 
 
---------------------------- 
PAPER TIGERS COUNTED NO MORE 
---------------------------- 
 
¶2.  It is now official that tiger numbers in India have dropped to 
1411, less than half of the earlier projected estimate of over 3600. 
 The much awaited tiger census, the first conducted using scientific 
methodology and in conjunction with the Wildlife Institute of India, 
covers the whole of the country with the exception of the 
Maoist-infested wildlife sanctuaries of central India and Sunderbans 
National Park in West Bengal where the counting has been delayed. 
While some of the decline can be attributed to grossly inflated 
prior estimates, poaching and loss of forest remain the major 
challenges to tiger survivability.  Although the census notes the 
presence of some success stories such as Corbett and Ranthambore 
National Parks, most parks have undergone a sharp decline in numbers 
- most seriously at Kanha and Panna National Parks which are facing 
a potential total loss of tigers. 
 
¶3.  The Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007 - 2012) has allocated $153 
million for tiger conservation which will include upgrading eight 
protected areas to tiger reserves as well as relocating communities 
living inside parks.  Th% Prime Minister reacted to the tiger census 
by asking the Chief Ministers of each state to take personal charge 
of tiger conservation and formulate State Tiger Conservation Plans 
that include park management, recruitment of new staff, and 
provision of adequate resources for state forest services.  In 
addition, the GOI announced a ten-fold increase in the relocation 
package for families living inside parks from INR 100,000 (approx. 
USD 2,522) to INR 1,000,000 (approx. USD 25.220).  The entire sum is 
not intended to be given directly to each family but rather to pay 
for all expenses associated with relocation such as transportation 
and housing. 
 
¶4.  India's tiger count and forest loss has caused justifiably 
anguished reactions in the press although much of the reporting on 
the new government initiatives to address the problem has been 
inaccurate.  For example, all national dailies noted the creation of 
eight "new" tiger reserves giving the impression the GOI was setting 
aside new land for tigers.  This is in fact not the case.  MoEF's 
Inspector General of Wildlife, Dr. R.B. Lal clarified to Emboffs 
that the eight new reserves are in fact existing protected areas 
with indigenous tiger populations which will be reclassified as 
tiger reserves. 
 
¶5.  Former Project Tiger Director, P.K. Sen told Emboffs he believes 
the GOI's new plan has a few flaws and does not address all the 
issues.  Sen commented that creating more tiger reserves will reduce 
already strained resources at existing reserves and believes a 
better approach would be to strengthen conservation efforts at 
existing tiger reserves.  Sen also noted a major hurdle that was not 
addressed was the manner in which GOI funding for tiger and wildlife 
conservation is allocated.  The GOI provides funding directly to 
state governments for conservation but substantial sums are diverted 
at the state level to unrelated projects and also to the payment of 
state government salaries for officials not involved in wildlife 
conservation.  Sen stated that what money does get through for 
wildlife conservation usually shows up about halfway through the 
fiscal year. 
 
------------------------------------ 
FOREST LOSS: THE COST OF DEVELOPMENT 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶6.  The State of the Forest Report notes that between 2003 and 2005 
India lost over 700 sq kms of forest cover while over 600 sq km of 
healthy forests have been reduced to degraded forest despite GOI 
policy, in effect during the same period, to increase total forest 
cover until one-third of India's landmass was covered by forest.  At 
present, India has 20.6 percent of its land under forest cover out 
of which only 1.7 percent is categorized as dense forest and 10.12 
 
NEW DELHI 00000614  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
percent as moderately dense forest.  The remainder is considered 
degraded forest.  Moreover experts believe the loss of forest cover 
is substantially more than what is indicated in the State of the 
Forest Report due to the fact that GOI figures include ecologically 
questionable monoculture plantations as forests.  An article in the 
Times of India noted that if the monoculture plantations were 
removed from the calculus, forest loss between 2003 and 2005 would 
exceed 6000 sq kms. 
 
¶7.  The vast majority of the forest loss noted in the State of the 
Forest Report is due to increases in infrastructure development and 
mining activities in forested areas, including in legally inviolate 
protected areas.  While the MoEF is required to approve 
Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) and green light only projects 
that are within environmental regulations, the rules are routinely 
flouted in the name of development.  EIAs are often fraudulent but 
approved anyway, one such case which was reported in the national 
press involved an EIA for a bauxite mining operation in tropical 
Maharashtra State lifted directly from a mine located in Russia. 
The EIA described the vegetation as being predominantly a mix of 
spruce and birch which while prevalent in Russia, are not in 
Maharashtra.  Despite the glaring deficiencies in the EIA, it was 
approved by the MoEF.  As a result there is little to no faith in 
the EIA process.  Local communities feel short-changed by losing 
access to forest which also leads to greater human-wildlife conflict 
due to habitat loss. 
 
¶8.  In discussing the State of the Forests, Kanchi Kohli, an 
environmental activist, told Emboffs that between 2003 and 2007, 
approximately 311,220 hectares of forest has been cleared with MoEF 
approval for non-forest use.  This amounts to 25 percent of all 
government clearances given since 1980 when the Forest Conservation 
Act was framed.  Krishnendu Bose, a wildlife filmmaker, touched on 
the point saying he regrets the fact policymakers tend to equate 
forests with money.  They see the forest only as land to be divided 
between development projects and mining concerns with the leftover 
to be distributed to tribal communities. 
 
¶9.  COMMENT:  The Tiger Census and the State of the Forest report 
are both indicative of a malaise that runs throughout the country 
when it comes to wildlife and forest conservation.  Although it is 
broadly agreed that tigers require inviolate areas free from human 
habitation, very little sincere efforts have gone into creating such 
areas while a great deal of mining, development, and poaching has 
occurred in supposedly protected areas.  Despite over 35 years of 
official conservation efforts embodied in the launch of Project 
Tiger in 1972, State Forest Departments have not managed to 
successfully relocate most communities, nor have they managed to 
help communities have a stake in saving the forests.  However, the 
ten fold increase in the relocation package for families living in 
protected areas is a good sign that the GOI is finally willing to 
take on this sensitive task.  Whether the money is in fact used for 
its intended purpose remains to be seen.  END COMMENT. 
 
MULFORD