From wildlife to social media: The commercialisation of Karnataka's conservation efforts

"Alas, with the globalisation of the consumer society, restraint is no longer an idea much welcomed in other parts of the world either," says Ramachandra Guha in his latest book, Speaking With Nature: The Origin of Indian Environmentalism.

Guha, a historian, laments that unrestrained consumption, once seen as an American or European problem, has now become an 'aspirational' lifestyle across societies. In this backdrop, he pays tribute to 10 persons who contributed to Indian Environmentalism as 'socio-ecologists', serving both people and nature.

The historian’s concerns about unrestrained consumption appear to have come alive closer home, in Karnataka’s forests. Over the past two weeks, a series of scandals around king cobra (Ophiophagus hannah) conservation has brought to the fore once again a troubling contradiction: The very conservationists who built their careers advocating restraint from human interference and reduced carbon footprint on natural habitats seem to have forsaken it. 

Decades of work at the Agumbe Rainforest Research Station (ARRS) in Shivamogga district has been quickly overshadowed by a conflict of interest over the purchase of land inside the Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary by ARRS field director Ajay Giri’s wife. To put the matter in perspective, over the last three decades, conservationists have worked closely with forest officials to relocate tribal families from protected areas to create ‘inviolate’ places for wildlife.

But Giri, who did not respond to DH’s queries, is just one among a long line of conservationists who have invested huge sums of money in revenue lands located on the edge of eco-sensitive zones (ESZ) or within the core areas of sanctuaries and reserves. 

At the Kalinga Centre for Rainforest Ecology (KCRE), located in the middle of the Eco Sensitive Zone (ESZ) of Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary in the Kudremukh Wildlife Division, business is booming. The centre offers 'stay' and 'experience' to people at anywhere between Rs 6,050 per night and Rs 7,865 per night. Then there are workshops for researchers charged at Rs 7,500 to Rs 10,000 and a summer camp for teenagers charged at Rs 31,000 per head. 

To a question, Sivaram Babu M, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Kudremukh Wildlife Division, said he will look into the issues raised by DH. "KCRE has been set up in the ESZ limits. We will see whether they have received clearance to run commercial and research activities," he said.

KCRE is built by P Gowri Shankar, who came to the limelight with his research work on the king cobras. Responding to queries by DH, Shankar initially denied that the centre was located in the ESZ. When it was pointed out that the government notification puts the KCRE about 800 metres between the boundaries of the core area and ESZ, Shankar did not respond.

To queries about monetisation of conservation research, Shankar said KCRE was a Skill-India certified 'for-profit environmental education firm', but failed to provide details of any specific permission granted by the forest department. According to Shankar, 'stay' and 'experience' activities constitute 'agro tourism'. In reality, these are regulated activities which require the permission of the forest, tourism and other departments.

Ironically, these activities are organised in the name of Kalinga, or the king cobra, conservation, which is not a snake in conflict with humans as per guidelines issued by the Karnataka Forest Department. Snakes that are in conflict in Karnataka and India are the ‘Big Four’ (Russel’s viper, common krait, Indian cobra and saw-scaled viper), which account for most of the 58,000 deaths due to snake bites per year. Moreover, as far back as 2013, Gowri Shankar himself acknowledged the need to save smaller snakes, as a lead author in a research paper titled Factors influencing human hostility to King Cobras.

Then why chase the king cobra? Because the snake’s branding and striking looks rake in the money. A closer look at the social media profiles of some conservationists reveals a world where core conservation has been commercialised and commodified to byte-sized video clips, consumed more for entertainment than for education.

Meanwhile, there is no information on whether guidelines (for instance, getting mandatory permission from the Chief Wildlife Warden) are followed while handling the king cobra. 

Even as the king cobra habitat – the Western Ghats – comes under the bulldozers in the name of ‘development’ projects, the snake continues to be at the epicentre of conservation activities. Be it illegal road widening, mining work or legalised destruction proposed by many works like the Sharavathy Pumped Storage Project, most established conservationists and NGOs working in the sector have maintained a stoic silence. In fact, the real resistance has come not from people fluent in the sophisticated language of conservation but from those who coexist with the wildlife and work on the ground. 

Responding to the developments over the past few weeks, Sagar-based conservationist Akhilesh Chipli said that organisations which are functioning with multiple violations should be held to account. "Forest officers are custodians of the forests and wildlife on behalf of the public. It is time they protect biodiversity from self-serving researchers and send a clear message that nobody is allowed to monetise wildlife and do business in the name of conservation," he said.

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (EWPRT) B P Ravi said forest staff at the division level need to monitor the research work done by NGOs. "Permissions given by the department need to be monitored. The divisional officers should report in case any of the conditions are violated. The Research Advisory Committee checks compliance. Any violation allows the department to take up an inquiry and suspend the research," he said.

Senior conservationist Madhav Gadgil said he saw the emerging contradictions very early on, in the 1970s. "There are many self-serving NGOs. I have seen many bogus efforts for many decades," he said.

Back in 2001, Gadgil examined the structural aspects of the problem and pointed out 'pseudo-scientific' management of India's natural resources as a key source of several contradictions and conflicts of interest. "Now, a genuinely scientific enterprise would eliminate such contradictions rapidly through an open process of assessment of facts and working hypotheses. But the management of India's natural resources is a closed, highly centralised, bureaucratic enterprise which leaves no scope for corrective response," he wrote in Ecological Journeys: The Science and Politics of Conservation in India.

State Forest, Ecology and Environment Minister Eshwar B Khandre agreed that conservation should be democratic and built on trust, but added that the department has a duty to perform. "We definitely want people's participation in conservation. However, this should not lead to individuals and NGOs coming up with hidden agendas and self-serving goals. I will convene a meeting of senior officials to draft revised guidelines to prevent misuse of permissions given for wildlife research and projects within forest areas. Recent incidents have underlined the need to monitor conservation work and research undertaken by conservationists and NGOs. Those working in forests and wildlife must submit periodical reports, which our officers should verify through field inspections," he said.

However, the government has not set a good example overall. In fact, a conservationist noted that, except for the lack of necessary permits, KCRE essentially followed the model of the Karnataka government’s Jungle Lodges and Resorts, which attract far more tourists and leave greater ecological footprints.

Research

On the other hand, both state and central governments have stopped funding research. The crackdown on NGOs following the protests against the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project has gradually morphed into a panopticon-like system, where many organisations that adopt adversarial positions have been stripped of their licenses to access foreign funding.

Today, NGOs are dependent on grants from corporate companies, which insist that organisations be self-sustaining. Even organisations that genuinely work for conservation are in a situation where their integrity would eventually become contingent upon the conduct of their donor entities.

“When the government, a tax-levying entity, sets up agencies to collect corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds for conservation, it will result in conflicts of interest. A company which contributes funds will find it easy to get regulatory clearances," a conservationist said, adding that a course correction was needed.

For K S Seshadri, faculty at Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment, such a correction is possible when conservationists operate with service-mindedness. “One of the best examples of a conservationist turning into a guardian of biodiversity is G N Ashoka Vardhana. He purchased revenue land abutting the Western Ghats in 2006 and has left it untouched. He only allows researchers to stay in the container home and work without disturbing the ecosystem,” he said.

For Ashoka Vardhana, the decision not to monetise the 15 acres of ‘Ashoka Vana’ was borne out of a conscious desire to keep it as a natural forest. “I have earned enough for my living and decided that’s enough,” he said. He manifests the restraint that Guha holds as the foundation of conservation, while stressing the need for people-centric conservation on the lines of the Chipko movement.

Lack of restraint has already turned health, education and social services into sectors where ‘enterprising’ deep pockets can spin money, all at the cost of the vulnerable and the downtrodden. Wildlife is a relatively new frontier for corporate India, which seems to be eager to greenwash and build its brands.