JavaScript must be enabled in order for you to use the Site in standard view. However, it seems JavaScript is either disabled or not supported by your browser. To use standard view, enable JavaScript by changing your browser options.

| Last Updated:08/11/2019

Latest News

Archive

Wildlife lovers against shifting T-24


Times of India, New Delhi, 14 May, 2015

Rachna Singh,


 

JAIPUR: While speculation is still on whether T-24 will be sentenced to a life in captivity, opposing its shifting has become a movement among wildlife lovers. Various social networking sites and forums have come out against the forest department's intention to do so.

 

After the death of Gheesu Singh, a forester in an attack by a male tiger in Ranthambore National Park, the confusion among wildlife lovers still remains as to whether it was T-72 or T-24 that did it. So far the department says that since T-24 earlier had killed three persons, it is presumed that it would be T-24. But that is not the case.

 

"In the first case in Indala (2010) the boy had entered the park to cut wood. He was attacked when he threw the axe at the tiger. It was not T-24's territory and at that time the death of the boy was not attributed to T-24. In fact, even when the staff was attacked by the tiger in 2012; the previous death was not attributed to T-24. And in the recent case, initially the staff said it was T-72. It was only the next day that they presumed T-24 had killed all four. Without observing the tiger's behaviour it should not be sent in exile and deprived of its natural habitat," said A C Chaubey, who was the chief wildlife warden in 2012.

 

The tiger has also fathered two cubs with T-39, the key tigress, in the tourism zone that are just 10 months old. Even if the tiger is sent to the Biological Park, the first issue would be the safety of those cubs. "Forest guards have been instructed to move in groups of two or three. They are vulnerable when they go to relieve themselves in the forest, which they should not do," said a source.

 

What is required is to regulate traffic to the Ganesh Temple located in the Ranthambhore Fort to minimize the chances of man-animal conflict. With the pilgrim traffic having grown exponentially, relocation of the tiger is not the solution. "There should be managerial solutions for pilgrims. There could be forest department shuttles every 30 minutes from the main gate to ferry the pilgrims to and fro. A lot of times youngsters are seen strolling in the park enroute the Ganesh Temple just to take selfies. This could be very risky as this area falls in main tourism zone," said a wildlife lover regular at the park.

 

"In the Hindu shastras there is a provision for the temple to be shifted. The government can allocate land for the temple somewhere outside the park on the lines of Akshardham in Delhi. This would facilitate the pilgrims," he said.

 

Jaipur: While speculation is still on whether T 24 would be sentenced to a life in captivity, opposing the shifting has become a movement among wildlife lover. Various social networking sites and forums have come out against the forest department intention to do so.

 

After the death of Gheesu Singh, a forester in an attack by a male tiger in Ranthambore National Park, the confusion still remains on whether it was T-72 or T-24 among the wildlife lovers. So far the department says that since T24 previously had three incidents against him, it is presumed that it would be T 24 only. But that is not the case.

 

"In the first case in Indala (2010) the boy had entered the park to cut wood. He was attacked when he threw the axe at the tiger. It was not T24's territory and at that time the death of the boy was not attributed to T 24. In fact even when the staff was attacked by the tiger in 2012; the previous death was not attributed to T 24. And in the recent death initially the staff said it was T 72 and only the next day, all four deaths were endorsed to T 24. Without observing this tiger's behavior it should not be sent in exile and deprived of his natural habitat," said A C Chaubey, who was the chief wildlife warden in 2012.

 

Add to that the tiger is fathering two cubs of T 39 the key tigress in the tourism zone that are just 10 months old. Even if the tiger is sent to the Biological Park, the first issue would be the safety of those cubs if not, whichever tiger takes its place the man-animal conflict issue will still remain. "Forest guards have been instructed to move in groups of two or three. They get vulnerable when they go to relieve themselves in the forest, which they should not do," said a source.

 

What is required is to regulate traffic to the Ganesh Temple located in the Ranthambhore fort to minimize the chances of a man-animal conflict. Relocation of the tiger is not the solution, with the pilgrim traffic having grown exponentially, on foot and bikes. "There should be managerial solutions for the pilgrims. There could be forest department shuttles every 30 minutes from the main gate to ferry the pilgrims- to and fro. A lot of times youngsters are seen strolling in the park enroute the Ganesh Temple just to take selfies. This could be very risky as this area falls in main tourism zone," said a wildlife lover regular at the park.

 

"In the Hindu shastra there is a provision for the temple to be shifted. The government can allocate land for the temple somewhere outside the park on the lines of Akshardham in Delhi. This would facilitate the pilgrims as well as be good for the park," he said.

 

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/flora-fauna/Wildlife-lovers-against-shifting-T-24/articleshow/47275289.cms