CRITICAL WILDLIFE HABITAT:What is it, how should it be implemented, and how is it being pushed through?
Sharachchandra Lele, Neema Pathak Broome, Atul Joshi, Akshay Chettri, Meenal Tatpati, Shruti Mokashi
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006, commonly known as the FRA, is the first legislation to explicitly address the historically ignored rights of forest dwellers in India. It recognizes that forest dwellers “are integral to the very survival and sustainability of the forest ecosystem” and confers on them, among other rights, community forest resource rights to sustainably manage and conserve forests and the biodiversity therein (CFR rights). It also outlines a mechanism for their exercise.
Simultaneously, the FRA provides a mechanism for addressing any conflicts that may arise between the exercise of these rights and the needs of wildlife within Protected Areas (PAs; i.e., Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks). It does so by providing for the possibility of notifying Critical Wildlife Habitats (CWHs) within PAs.
As of mid-2020, no CWHs had been notified in the country. However, triggered by a petition in the Mumbai High Court, the Maharashtra Forest Department constituted 54 Expert Committees for identifying CWHs in 54 PAs in the state in 2018-19. Processes towards the declaration of a CWH began in Melghat Wildlife Sanctuary in 2019, leading to much controversy and eventually a stay by the Court.
The proper implementation of the CWH provisions is vital for securing a socially just and effective conservation regime in the country. This, however, requires a thorough understanding of the complex provisions and processes involved in identifying and declaring CWHs—processes that have never before been carried out in India’s conservation landscape.
This report seeks to clarify in simple language the core legal provisions relating to CWH, their interpretation, and the processes necessary for their proper implementation on the ground. It also identifies where the ongoing process in Maharashtra has deviated from this legally implied process.