Status and conservation of the tiger in Uttaranchal, Northern India.

The land that is now the state of Uttaranchal has a glorious history in tiger conservation; it was in the Corbett Tiger Reserve (TR)—one of the country’s most priceless reserves—that one of the most credited conservation programs of the century, Project Tiger, was launched in 1973 (1). While most tiger habitats in the country are experiencing severe anthropogenic pressures leading to degradation, the tiger habitat in Uttaranchal and the conservation efforts of the government continue to give a glimmer of hope for the long-term survival of tigers in this young state, which was established in late 2000. A field assessment carried out by the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) with the support of Save the Tiger Fund (USA) in the year 2002–2003, is the most recent and comprehensive empirical evidence on the status of the tiger in the state (2). The strength of the tiger habitat here is largely from the hilly nature of the terrain, which arguably supports sufficient prey and offers safe hideouts for the sensitive tiger in the deep valleys and numerous nallahs. The relatively lower human density of the state (158 people in a km area) versus the national density of 324 people in a km area (3) and 45% forest cover versus the national forest cover of 20.5% (4) are the other factors that give hope for the survival of this magnificent species. A framework for prioritizing tiger conservation in the global perspective has included a considerable portion of the tiger habitats in Uttaranchal into 1 of the 11 level I tiger conservation units (top priority areas) identified in the Indian subcontinent. This underscores the significance attached to this state for the long-term conservation of the tiger (5). However, there is an urgent need to periodically assess the situation in the state, given the severe threats faced by the tiger throughout its range. According to Johnsingh et al. (2), almost the entire stretch of tiger habitat in Uttaranchal is under the bhabar (hilly) tract and occurs in three disjunct units, identified as tiger habitat blocks (THB), with poor or no connectivity between the blocks. From west to east, these THBs include the areas between the Yamuna River and the west bank of the Ganga River (referred to as THB I), the east bank of the Ganga and the west bank of the Gola River (THB II), and the east bank of Gola River and the Tanakpur-Khatima Highway and Sharda River (THB III) (Fig. 1). In the entire area of tiger distribution along the foothills of the Himalayas, from the Simbalbara Wildlife Sanctuary (Himachal Pradesh) to the Valmiki TR (Bihar), these THBs constitute the largest tiger habitat, approximately 6500 km. This area can support a minimum of 150 adult tigers, provided that corridors (connectivities) are established and strengthened, the habitat is managed, and the large wild ungulate species are well protected. The forest divisions (FD) and the protected area (PA) that fall in THB I (approx. 1800 km; Fig. 2) are Kalsi, Shivalik (Uttar Pradesh), Dehradun, Narendranagar (in part), and the western part of Rajaji National Park (Uttaranchal); in THB II (approx. 3000 km; Fig. 2), the eastern part of Rajaji NP, Haridwar, Bijnor Plantation Division (Uttar Pradesh), Lansdowne, Corbett TR, Ramnagar, Nainital, Terai West, and Terai Central (Uttaranchal); and in THB III (approx. 1800 km; Fig. 2), Terai East, Haldwani, and Champawat. Tigers also occasionally range into the lower reaches of the Nainital FD. During the 2002–2003 survey (except for the Kalsi, Dehradun, Narendranagar, and Haridwar FDs, and the Bijnor Plantation Division), evidence of tiger use was observed in all the FDs and the PA. Among these, the Corbett TR had the highest tiger use (approx. 41%; range, 19.2–63.2%) followed by the Ramnagar FD (20.7%; range, 2.7–38.7%). Overall, there was high variation in the frequency of occurrence of tigers in the state, indicating a patchy distribution. In other words, even within the FDs and PAs, while some areas had a higher concentration or frequency of use, most other areas were poorly used. For instance, although the Lansdowne FD, recognized as a corridor connecting the Rajaji (NP) with the Corbett TR, scored 16.8%, some areas, between Laldhang and Kotdwar, were devoid of tiger use (0%) and others had a value as high as 45% (around Koluchaur). Surprisingly, the Rajaji NP scored quite low (12.9%), with high variation, suggesting that tiger use is still low there, because tigers were reported only from the Dholkhand, Chilla, and Gauri Ranges. In contrast, the forests of the Terai West and the Ramnagar FDs, which are not part of any protected area, scored better. This, however, should not be interpreted to indicate that tigers are faring well in the reserved forests; it is their proximity to the Corbett TR that benefits these areas. Nevertheless, it should be clearly understood that for the conservation of the tiger, all areas are important, with some areas acting as a source (e.g. Corbett TR and Rajaji NP) and other areas providing connectivity (e.g., Lansdowne division), thereby, facilitating the long-term survival of the tiger in Uttaranchal. The study report (2) has several site specific, as well as overall recommendations. Given the deteriorating situations elsewhere and the strength of the habitat status in Uttaranchal, it is likely that this state has the potential to become the tiger state of north India, attracting conservation attention and enhanced tourism. But, for this to happen, the state has to initiate certain radical steps to counterbalance the increasing threats, otherwise the state will helplessly witness the diminishing status of tiger in its territory as well. We advise urgent action on the following issues: Poaching of the tiger and its prey species is prevalent, but evidence may not be easily available. With the help of local informants and forest staff, it is important to locate the ‘‘poaching-prone’’ areas and enhance the patrolling and antipoaching measures. Johnsingh and Negi (6) found that nearly 20 gun and ammunition shops in this landscape between Sahranpur and Tanakpur sell about 100 000 cartridges annually, the bulk of which might be used for poaching. Already in the early 1930s, Champion (7) recommended sawing off the barrels of crop-protection guns to make them ineffective for poaching. All guns in Uttaranchal should be replaced with specially made guns with short barrels, which cannot be used for poaching. Gun owners could continue to keep their gun rights, which, however, should be kept in the safe custody of the government. International conservation agencies and the government of India should come up with sufficient funds for this gun-replacement program. This program, essentially needed to protect the tiger’s prey, is likely to get enormous support and appreciation from those concerned about the future of the tiger. Habitat fragmentation and degradation are on the rise, threatening the habitat contiguity and quality. Unless habitat connectivity is established and strengthened, the existing tiger habitat in Uttaranchal is bound to become habitat islands, increasing the extinction risk from inbreeding, disease, and poaching. In this regard, three corridors deserve mention: