Experts rue lack of transparency, blame forest officers in Karnataka

Experts have underscored the lack of transparency in the forest department and blamed some of its officials for allegedly possessing wildlife artefacts.

This is amid the raging controversy in the state following the recent arrest of Varthur Santhosh for allegedly wearing a chain with a tiger claw pendant and searches at the residences of some, including popular actor Darshan Thoogudeepa and actor-BJP MP Jaggesh.

Darshan Kumar, a Deputy Range Forest Officer (DRFO) in Chikkamagaluru’s Kalasa, was suspended for allegedly possessing a tiger claw after he had posted a photograph on social media. Similar allegations were also levelled against another senior officer at the Bhadra Wildlife Sanctuary.

Joseph Hoover, an activist and former member of the State Board for Wildlife in Karnataka, said that there have been many instances where the dead tiger’s claws are removed by certain officers.

“They [the officers] ask their staff to do it,” Hoover told DH. “When the autopsy is done, these people get the claw removed. We know of an officer who has done it. There are instances when the whisker of a tiger is taken away, which is used in rings.”

Hoover said the acts of some officers were an embarrassment to the entire forest force.

“Thousands are slogging to save the forest and the wildlife,” Hoover said. “And then you have some who think wearing tiger claws he will become a tiger. Some do it for personal gain, give it to their relatives or market it through their network. If the officers themselves do it, why wouldn’t poachers do it, too.”

Praveen Bhargav, a trustee at Wildlife First and a former member of the National Board for Wildlife, called for more transparency.

“Currently, there is a serious disconnect to the field realities of law enforcement,” Bhargav told DH. “The system for inspection and post mortem of large carnivores when found dead or hunted has to be tightened. A senior officer at least at the rank of Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) must be present along with a representative of a knowledgeable NGO.”

Bhargav called for the entire process of post-mortem to be videographed and posted on the department’s website for “transparency and accountability” and highlighted the need for a process of safekeeping after forensic analysis as it could also be evidence in a subsequent trial.

“This is an organised crime and has to be treated as such. Therefore, the original statement of the forest minister of constituting the task force is the correct stand. In fact, in my opinion, it should be a joint task force of police and forest as some of the offences are covered under the IPC,” he said.

Action is being taken: PCCF

Subhash K Malkhede, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) and Chief Wildlife Warden, told DH that when a complaint is received, the department initiates action.

Hurting peacocks to pluck their feather is punishable: Forest Minister

Forest, Ecology, and Environment Minister Eshwar Khandre said that collecting naturally shed peacock feathers and selling them within the country was not illegal.

“Peacock tail feathers are exempted under Section 43 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972,” he said, adding that hurting the bird to pluck the feathers was a punishable offence.