Political posturing, encroachments are eating into Mhadei's tiger territory Paul Fernandes, Rajendra P Kerkar & Murari Shetye, TNN

Caranzol: The issue of settlements and encroachments within the Mhadei wildlife sanctuary and its fringes, coupled with political posturing, is slowly eating into tiger territory. In 1999, the official appointed to hear stakeholders affected by the sanctuary's notification received a total of 117 claims from residents of villages falling within the sanctuary. A few years later, figures provided in the North Goa working plan indicated encroachments of around 1,539.71 ha in 21 villages under the Valpoi range and four villages under the Keri range of the sanctuary. "Though there are no proper records regarding encroachments, the satellite imagery (with 1999 as cut-off) can be used to determine fresh incursions within the sanctuary's limits," a government official said. On June 3, 1999, the government notified 44 sq km of the Mhadei wildlife sanctuary's 208 sq km area under Section 26A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. This area had been earlier declared a reserve forest and was clear of encumbrances. The remainder 164 sq km was notified under Section 18 of the same Act as it included encroachments. "Notifying the area under this mode meant the claims of those interested in the land could be heard," an official explained. P V Savant was appointed as the revenue officer and collector for the sanctuary and was directed to hear claims of aggrieved stakeholders. He received 10 claims, including eight from individual families, two separately from a group of 96 villagers from Zarme and 13 from Thane-Dongurli and Ivrem-Buzuruco of Thane Dongurli panchayat, staking claim to forest lands. In their deposition, the claimants stated they had developed and brought specific areas in forest land under cashew plantation. They were in possession of the land for two to four decades and sustained their families on cashew and other produce, they informed Savant. Some prayed that they should be granted occupancy right as per the land revenue code and rules, even though they could not produce documentary evidence. The form I & XIV they produced to support their cases indicated that they were classified encroachers on government land. Savant observed, among other remarks, that the state should review the proposal of including Zarme and Ivrem-Buzuruco in the sanctuary as lots of land was occupied by encroachers. The government had, incidentally, granted occupancy rights to 104 persons during 1983, 1984 and 1985. Of these, 99 cases are in the sanctuary. The extent of area granted under occupancy rights varies from 850 sq m to 1,5250 sq m. While the government has granted rights to some farmers, a process of regularization is still in progress by the revenue department, say sources. As per records, sanads (occupancy rights) were issued in 42 cases prior to 1980 in Ivrem Buzuruco. While survey numbers were mentioned in the sanads in respect of one person in two cases, none were mentioned in the other 40 cases. Savant had noted in an order: "...considering the ground reality of large areas of proposed sanctuary under cashew plantations the state is advised to review the sanctuary proposal." He further urged the government to prevent further encroachments by demarcating old and new encroachments. But forest officials say that doing this will change the boundaries of the sanctuary. The government subsequently appointed a committee headed by Hemant Karapurkar to examine the rationale for de-notification of the two sanctuaries (Neturlim wildlife sanctuary in Sanguem had been notified along with Mhadei). The Karapurkar committee had stated in its report that 1,826 families are affected by the proposal in Mhadei. "However, the committee did not provide either the list of the persons or the survey numbers of those claiming to be affected," alleges Claude Alvares, director, NGO Goa Foundation. Forest minister Felipe Neri Rodrigues was not available for comment, while additional principal conservator of forests Shashi Kumar avoided any discussion on the issue. The government's indecision is only aggravating the problem, forest officials and greens both agree. A forest official conceded, "It is not helping the cause of the tiger nor the people in keeping the issue burning." Environmentalists suggest that the government has to decide the issue of encroachments within the sanctuary. Fixing a cut-off period to draw a line between old and new encroachments is advisable, they say. "The government has to approach the Supreme Court and seek its advice on the matter," says Talulah D'Silva of Mission Green, Goa. This NGO had initiated an e-petition with an appeal to declare the Mhadei wildlife sanctuary as a tiger reserve and a second one, seeking local support for it. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/goa/Political-posturing-encroachments-are-eating-into-Mhadeis-tiger-territory/articleshow/11116262.cms