Association for Species Conservation in India

A

 

Undermining the Son gharials:  A report on the illegal sandmining in the Son gharial sanctuary.

 

The Sancutary:

 

The Son Gharial Sanctuary is primarily situated in the Sidhi district ofthe Central Indian State, Madhya Pradesh, with very small portions extending to the Satna and Shahdol districts. The Sidhidistrict lies in the North East of the state, bordering Uttar Pradesh, and is home to four protected areas - Sanjay National Park, Sanjay-Dubari Sanctuary, Bagdara Sanctuary and Son Gharial Sanctuary.
 

Photo 1: 'Jogdha' is the place which is best known for viewing Gharials, Muggers, turtles etc.	Photo 2 : A picture of the Son river.

In 1979 a systematic survey of the proposed sanctuary area was undertaken jointly by the Madhya Pradesh Forest Department and the United Nations Development Programme (U.N.D.P) and the area was found to have high potential for crocodilians. In 1981 the government of Madhya Pradesh declared specified lengths of the river Son and its tributaries, Gopad and Banas, as Son Gharial sanctuary, with the intention of protecting the river fauna, especially the crocodilians - gharial and mugger.
 

The lengthwise breakup of the sanctuary is as follows:
 

River	Length (km)	Area
Son	160.93	200 meters on each side
Gopad	25.75	of these lengths
Banas	22.53	of the rivers

 

Thus the total length of the sanctuary is 209.21 kms, located between latitudes 24 deg 15 min and 14 deg 30 min North and longitudes 81 deg 15 min and 82 deg 45 min East. Inhabitants of 200 revenue villages along thelength of the river, exercise rights in the notified area - 108 villages are inSidhi district and the rest in Satna and Shahdol districts. Basically some agricultural land andfew houses in these villages come in the notified area. According to the 1998 census there are 24 muggers (crocodiles) and 62 gharials in thesanctuary.
 
 

About Gharials:

 

Gharials can easily be distinguished from other crocodiles by the long and narrow snout which ends in a bulbous tip. The adult male has a large pot-like cartilaginous mass on the tip of the snout, hence the name gharial (ghara = pot). They are confined to the Indus, Ganga, Brahmaputra and the Mahanadi river systems in the Indian Subcontinent and the Irrawady and Arrakan river systems in Myanmar. Gharials are river dwelling crocodililans inhabiting deep pools at river junctions and bends, called "kunds" or "dahas", and the deep gorges in hilly country. They spread out with the flood waters of the monsoon, and return to the perennial "kunds" or "dahas" at the end of the rains. Midstream islands and sandbanks are used for basking, particularly during the winter months (December to January) and gharials are often seen near river banks during the high water monsoon months. They predominantly eat fish, thoughturtles, birds and small mammals also form part of their food. The mating behaviour of the gharial in its basic pattern is similar to that of other crocodilians. The gharial nests are sited in sand which ensure high incubation success. Predation on gharials is largely in the nest and hatchling stages from nest predators such as rats, pigs, jackals and monitor lizards. Hatchling are taken by birds of prey, and in water by large turtles and fish. Since the natural predation rate is already very high it is necessary to ensure that all impacts due to human activity are minimum. In the Son-gharial sanctuary, the nesting grounds of the gharial and mugger are being destroyed by the sandmining activities. A detailed study is necessary to quantify the extent of the damage.
 

Settlement of rights: Unsettling news for the Gharial?

 

Protected Areas in India are declared under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, as ammended in 1991.There are two main (and a third, mostly unused) categories: national parks (granted greater legal protection, supposed to be free of virtually all human uses) and sanctuaries (with more scope for people's activities to continue within, but only at the discretion of wildlife authorities). These PAs come under the Wildlife Wing of the Forest Department, though lands within them may also be under the jurisdiction of other government agencies, or belong to private parties, including villagers. Once the Government issues a notification declaring its intention to declare an area as a sanctuary or a national park, the district collector ( or an officer designated by the Collector) is required to initiate the settlement of rights procedure in the protected area.The procedure entails issuing a notice to all villagers (and other users of the sanctuary area) to claim rights, if any.

Once all claims are in , the officer ascertains which rights are valid and which not, and then decides whether to:

(a)  acquire some or all the rights by paying compensation or some other alternative ( for people staying inside Protected Areas this may also mean being displaced).

(b)  Allow some or all rights to continue within the PA ( in the case of sanctuary only, this is not permisssible for national parks)

(c) recommend the deletion of those parts of the PA which are encumbered with rights
 

Settlement in Son:

Without consulting the wildlife authorities or taking the opinion ofwildlife scientists, the Collector, Sidhi, hadissued an 'order' dated 30.6.97 'deleting' most of the Son gharial sanctuary except for areas falling within one kilometre radius of six places - Shikarganj, Koldaha, Jogdaha, Kuthlidaha, Beechi and Khairhani (these are areas of deep waters located at various points on the river and inhabited by the gharials in the dry season). The primary reasons cited for this were (as per Collector's original letter in Hindi):
 

a) Since the Son river enters Sidhi district from the South, flowing towards the North East, a large geographical area of the district comes in the sanctuary, thus affecting 108 villages. If the welfare of the 108 villages was to be seen and their claims were to be examined, it would take a long time for the settlement of rights. Additionally it would create several problems including the displacement of these 108 villages and in general hamper the welfare of the residents of this District.

b) In light of the above it was enquired and found that crocodiles and gharials are only found in the deep waters (at the places mentioned above).

c) Additionally the Panchayats are not getting the revenue from the sand of the river, which should be done for successful implementation of the Panchayat Raj Act.
 

The forest department has rejected the order on the following grounds ( as per letter issued by the forest department):
 

a) This denotification will defeat the very purpose of setting up of this sanctuary, and the conservation objectives will not be met.

b) Since the areas denotified will no more be under legal protection it will make the task of wildlife protection of the entire area very difficult.

c) It will affect the movement of the gharials and other fauna, posing a problem to their security.

d) Since the gharials and crocodiles lay their eggs and breed in the sands on the river bank, mining these areas will adversely affect these processes. The sanctuary administration will then be unable to control these activities.

e) Since Section 24 (2) (c)of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, has the provision for the rights of people to continue in a sanctuary, on the Chief Wildlife Warden's recommendations, it is not necessary that the people are displaced.
 

Subsequently, this move for denotification has also been rejected by the committee set up by the Ministry of Environment & Forests for rationalising the boundaries of protected areas. Though there seems to be temporary respite for the sanctuary, the future of the gharials is far from safe.
 
 

Sandmining and other threats

 

Photo 3: A stone marks the boundary of the sanctuary - 200m from the river bank.	Photo 4 : The photograph shows the sand mounds extending on either side of the river bank.

Jogdaha, which is one of the prime areas for spotting gharials was visited during the investigation. This lies on the Sidhi - Hanumana road (via Bahri). Six gharials and one crocodile were spotted basking in the sun in the span of about an hour. Three more gharials and a turtle weresighted swimming in the water. Interactions with local forest staff indicated that the main sand mining areas in the sanctuary were Churhat and Khadbada.According to them poaching of crocodiles, gharials and turtles was absent and fishing with dynamite waslargely not done in the area. They felt that a lack of staff greatly reduced their effectivity in patrolling the area. While returning to Sidhi the Amiliya- Churhat road was taken, via Khadbada, Piparohar, Patpara and Gaughat. Initially sandmining from the river bed used to take place at Gaughat, but presently it has stopped. A lease has been given outside the sanctuary area in nearby Patpara ( here and elsewhere there are sand mounds extending for a considerable distance away from the river bank). This has been given with a NOC from the Forest Department (FD). The FDfeels the official leaseholder nearby functions as a watchdog in preventing sandmining from the riverbed. Meanwhile the FD has placed a barrier on the road going down towards the river bed to prevent vehicles from reaching the place.
 

Akauri, 5 kms short of Churhat, is the place which is worst affected by the illegal sand mining. This is the area the FD finds the most difficult to control. It is unsafe for the forest staff to venture into the area and make any seizures without armed forest personnel and policemen. The people associated with the mining have a long record of involvement in crime. In the past, the former Superintendent of the sanctuary, Mr. Dixit, had been beaten up when he intercepted some trucks leaving the area. This is largely due to them getting the support of some local politicians. In fact, during our visit to the village, the Range Forest Officer, Mr. Sharma, who had just joined two months back and had never visited Akauri and was thus unknown to the people, did not even divulge the fact that he was the RFO of the sanctuary. I interacted with the locals citing the reason that I was studying the settlement of rights process, which was what I was anyway looking at besides the illegal sandmining. In the village Akauri the Panchayat has issued a mining lease at Akauri Ghat, but the validity of this lease is disputed as it has been obtained without a NOC from the FD and is alleged to be within the sanctuary area (within 200 metres from the river bank). The present lease is in the name of Shivlal Singh, one of the Thakurs in the village. In any case hardly any sand is mined from this patch (outside the river banks). The modus operandi for the illegal sandmining is as follows:a'pit pass' is issued in the name of Akauri Ghat (the above mentioned patch) but the sand islifted directly from the river bed itself, at night. This is done because the sand from the river bed is of the finest quality and is also not mixed with mud as isthe sand on the banks. A visit to the site confirmed the above. There is very clear evidence of tyre tracks going down to the river bed and huge amounts of sand lifted from there. Some local villagers (members of the Kivat community, who do not have a direct stake in the sandmining), who we interacted with, said that around 10-12 trucks are filled every night. The village teacher, Mr. R.K.Patel, said that the forming of the sanctuary has caused a great revenue loss to the village and also a loss in employment. On our way out from the village, at a tea shop at the intersection with the main road, we met several key people - Abhadlal Patel, the Patwari, Trilok Singh, the Sarpanch, Manojkumar Singh, the Panchayat secretary, and Kalyan Singh, who has held the lease to the mining land between 1984-87. Kalyan Singh, who is infamous for his involvement in crime, explained the case on behalf of the villagers, citing the Collector's letter, and said that the development of Sidhi District was being hampered due to these mining restrictions. According to him the FD was unnecessary being an obstacle when they have the support of both the Collector and the Mining Department. He felt the proper implementation of Panchayati Raj was being affected by these laws of the FD. It is interesting to note that though effective employment of Panchayati Raj is cited as a reason, the mining in Akauri has mainly been controlled by afew influential upper-caste Thakurs, as informed by Kalyan Singh.
 

Khadbada Ghat was the second area cited by everyone for illegal sand mining, though it was also pointed out that this was on a significantly lower scale than Akauri. On visiting the site I found some areas where sand had been removed and there weresigns of tractor tracks, but on a much lower scale than had been expected.The possible reason could be that the Sarpanch, Vishwakarma (who used to also mine the river bed earlier), has recently been givena mining lease with the FD's NOC outside the sanctuary area nearby and thus he is ensuring that the river bed is protected. At least this is what the FD hopes to achieve in the future. It is early days though, and a vigil will have to be kept in this region and the entire area explored in detail as it has a history of illegal mining. But the FD also stated that the Khadbada mining was comparatively easier to control as less influential people were involved in the mining.
 

Some villagers from Shikarganj whom I met (though I did not visit the place), said that the company building the bridge across the Son at Shikarganj was extracting the sand from the river bedin the sanctuary, as were others. This could not be confirmed but needs to be examined in detail. Illegal sandmining is occuring at various places in varying scales but the critical area continues to be Akauri.The FD has made 27 seizures of trucks carrying illegally mined sand, from 1995 to July 1998.
 

With a length of 209 kms to patrol, the FD is highly understaffed in the area. There is one Superintendent ( of the rank of Assistant Conservator of Forests) with only one Range Forest Officer (RFO) under him. The RFO presently has only 4 foresters, 7 guards, 3 boatman (but no working boats!) and 3 watchman to patrol theentire 209 kms. Poor infrastructure and funding support do not make things easier for the FD. These sentiments were also reflected in the communication with the Director, Sanjay National Park, Mr. Asit Gopal.He also expressed theneed for a systematic ecological study to be done on the gharials and other fauna, to understand the breeding patterns, nesting sites, impact of mining on breeding etc. - all factors which can help implement more well-directed protection & management measures.
 
 

Photo 5: tyre tracks of vehicles involved in sand mining at Akaurighat. This is the region which is worst affected by mining.	Photo 6: This picture taken at Jogdha shows a Gharial on the left and a Mugger on the right (camouflaged with the stony areas).

What does the future hold?

 

The approach ofdenotifying areas in protected areas,for rights to continue, is inherently faulty, when there is a provision in the law available to facilitate both protection of the area and continuation of rights. The only long-term solution to maintain the sanctity of the protected area is to ensure that peoples rights sustainable with the objectives of conservation are maintained.Where people's resource uses are unsustainable, alternatives need to be provided andinnovative livelihoodschemes evolved. Participatory methods of wildlife management have to be used. Key issues to be addressed for the future of Son Gharial Sanctuary will be:

1)Detailed ecological studies of the gharial and its habitat, including impacts of mining on breeding etc.

2)Improved infrastructural, financial and staffing support for the Forest Department

3)Villagers inhabiting the 200 villages along the river can become allies in conservation provided their rights and livelihoods are secure, and benefits are seen to be generated.Ecodevelopment activities should be taken up, in consultation with the local people and appropriate NGOs, right from the planning stages, to ensure that appropriate inputs are given.

4)A joint management strategy for the sanctuary involving local people. 
 

If anyone wishes to conduct research or help organise a study in the area, or has any further queries,, please contact:

Mr. Asit Gopal, Director, Sanjay National Park,

Sidhi(Madhya Pradesh)
 
 

This report is based on a field visit by Neeraj Vagholikar, member, Kalpavriksh, Environmental Action Group. Contact: Kalpavriksh, 5Shri Dutta Krupa, 908 Deccan Gymkhana, Pune -411004Tel/ Fax: 020 - 5654239email: ashish@nda.vsnl.net.in