Review of Tiger Assessmnet Reports - GOI

[Sakobav]

This is an old report prepared in 2005 by Government of India and IUCN - The World Conservation Union Asia Regional Office, Bangkok. Maybe it was attached here before, it has a map of India where all the Tiger Sanctuaries.just wanted to share it was lying filed on my old PC. I am pretty sure there fewer of these great animals around now...

Executive Summary
In July 2004, the Project Tiger Directorate appointed eight wildlife professionals to undertake
an independent assessment of all 28 Tiger Reserves in India. The monitors were selected
based on their professional background, expertise, absence of conflict of interest and
independence from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, which
has been mandated to provide funding support and guidance to States for managing the
Tiger Reserves. The assessment was based on the Management Effectiveness Assessment
Framework (MEAF) developed by the lUCN World Commission on Protected Areas, adapted
to the Indian context, as a standardized approach (and toolkit) to help managers evaluate
the effectiveness of protected area management. A total of 45 parameters were used to
arrive at an aggregated score for evaluating the management effectiveness of each Tiger
Reserve.
lUCN was asked by the Government of India to use its in-house expertise as well as its
network of international experts to undertake a peer review of the Tiger Reserve assessments
done by the monitors. Accordingly, lUCN Asia Regional Office (Bangkok) arranged to review
all 28 Tiger Reserve assessments and, specifically, comment on the compliance of criteria
used, the plausibility of the overall results, the methodology followed, and to make
recommendations on the future use of the MEAF for Tiger Reserves in India. This report
represents a synthesis of the findings of the lUCN review.
In regard to the Management Effectiveness Assessment Framework (MEAF), the methodology
for assessment of the Reserves focused on four of the, six evaluation elements. As a
result, the assessments provide good information on management “efficiency” (comparison
of inputs to outputs) but only limited guidance on management “effectiveness” (comparison
of outputs to outcomes). While the overall results provided by the monitors are plausible,
suggestions have been made for further improvements in the evaluation methodology to
ensure consistency of application among evaluators.
The independent assessment carried out by the Project Tiger Directorate found that out of
28 reserves, 10 may be rated as ‘Very Good’, 10 as ‘Good’, 6 as ‘Satisfactory and 2 as
‘Poor’.
The peer review by IUCN applied a tool called ‘Community Analysis Package’ to ascertain
whether there were management characteristics that could predict success or failure.
This analysis shows that the reserves would be classified into three primary ‘management
clusters’. There are 11 Tiger Reserves viz. Kanha (Madhya Pradesh), Dudhwa (Uttar Pradesh),
Corbett (Uttaranchal), Sunderbans (West Bengal), Palamau (Jharkhand), Valmiki (Bihar),
iii
Kalakad (Tamil Nadu), Buxa (West Bengal), Periyar (Kerala), Bandipur (Karnataka) and
Bhadra (Karnataka) which are doing well; 8 Tiger Reserves viz. Panna (Madhya Pradesh),
Tadoba-Andhari (Maharashtra), Bori-Satpura (Madhya Pradesh), Bandhavgarh (Madhya
Pradesh), Pench (Madhya Pradesh), Pench (Maharashtra), Melghat (Maharashtra) and
Simplipal (Orissa) are doing reasonably well; and 9 Tiger Reserves viz. Dampa (Mizoram),
Nameri (Assam), Manas (Assam), Pakke (Arunachal Pradesh), Nagarjunsagar-Srisailam
(Andhra Pradesh), Namdapha (Arunachal Pradesh), Ranthambhore (Rajasthan), Indravati
(Chhattishgarh) and Sariska (Rajasthan) which are at considerable risk and require immediate
remedial action.
A number of recommendations have been made for enhancing the MEAF evaluation
parameters and methodology for future assessments. In essence, these relate to
(a) providing contextual narrative with scoring to avoid ambiguity and misinterpretation;
(b) refinements to the MEAF Review Fields to accommodate reviewer’s comments;
(c) inclusion of Review Fields to assess cross-border issues; (d) standardization of the evaluation
procedures and providing clear guidelines to the monitors; and (e) full use of Strengths,
Weakness, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis. The evaluation process at the Reserve
level should involve all stakeholders, and should take into account the actual tiger population.
The results of the survey are valuable, and should be shared with the managers as lessons
learnt, to improve the conditions of the Reserves through adaptive management, particularly
in those Reserves that are at immediate risk. The results should also be used by the Reserves
in their regular reporting structures to the Project Tiger Directorate.
With further standardization and minimal expansion, the MEAF toolkit could become the
backbone of a regular and credible assessment programme for the Tiger Reserves in India.
The Reserve Managers should incorporate in their annual plans future management
effectiveness assessments. Where the results show the need for more information, the
next assessment should refocus on designing clearer criteria to capture such information.
For those seeking to save the wild tigers, tiger conservation in India has been the touchstone.
Both the Project Tiger and the Government of India should be commended for encouraging
independent evaluations and subsequent peer reviews of the current management of the
Tiger Reserves in a country that now holds the key to the future of tigers in the wild.
These conservation efforts must continue to be supported through adequate resources,
adaptive management and a strong political will. It also bears mention that India is one of
the first countries in Asia that has attempted to adopt the WCPA Management Effectiveness
Assessment Framework to its system of protected areas.

[prashantsingh]

According to the countrywide population estimation done by National Tiger Conservation Authoreity and Wild Life Institute of India (Dehradun) the population of tigers has been found to be 1411 (mind value), the lower limit being 1165 and the upper limit being 1657 respectively.

[Amit357]

Hi Prashant.i wouldnt be still convinced of the number cause in some parks Tiger census is still being done with Pugmarking as being the first perimeter, that being the primary reason for Project Tiger to pull frauds like Sarika and Kannha.I was speaking to a DFO Wildlife {was with them for a carnivora census},they are still using Pugmarking as the main perimeter for the census.Camera trapping is still not practiced in most of the Parks to the best of my knowldge,the only hope for the Royal Bengal Tiger is parts of Sunderbans and some dedicated wildlife staffers at a couple of more parks.I guess as long as the posting in the wildlife department is considered a Punishment posting what else can one expect.
Am not sure if WLII D.Dun has camera trapping equipment or the quality of the same but Belinda Wright has put the Tiger numbers in India between 800-1000,with the exact numbers of Tigers in the Sunderbans not properly accounted for.I guess parts of Sunderbans being in Bangladesh has left that gap.So the ame .
I would futher add that we as a Nation dont deserve the Tiger so we will lose them all in a couple of years courstey Sansar Chand and clan,who being more important to the politicans,and to the best of my knowldge wildlife cant vote nor are issued voter i card.

[prashantsingh]

For the first time in India these figures have been reached with the help of cameras and not with the help of "pug marks". No two tigers have the same stripes. Like human fingerprints which are different for every individual. The stripe patterns on every tiger is unique to itself (even siblings). Stripe pattern on the flank,limbs and forequarters were examined in detail and every tiger captured in the camera was given a unique identity. Sensors were placed 25 to 35 cms off the ground so as capture not only the tiger but also smaller mammals. Double sampling was carried out and the entire landscape was sampled at beat level (average 20 sq. km. area).I have full faith in the above mentioned figures.
Whatever the actual figures ( Belinda Wright's lower limit of 800 or the Wildlife Institutes upper limit of 1657) , the fact is that our tigers need help . Infact it's not just the tigers but all the animals he feeds on and every jungle he lives in, which needs all our protection.