Indian wildlife sanctuary, information data and its condition

[Shardul]

First, You completely ignored the vast majority of my post. I explained you the difference between 'Protected areas' and unprotected areas of India, which was important for this discussion. You said Kaziranga was a 'protected area' and Manas wasn't, which was completely wrong. In this sense the definition is important.

Secondly, the Project tiger link that you provided isn't opening.

"That link specifically speaks about the successful reserves compared to the unsuccessful and it specifically talks about the need for tourism and protection for the tigers to survive in those places."

And where did I claim that tourism isn't needed? My whole post was about the need for effective protection.


"But then, during the 1990s, tigers vanished from across the Indian subcontinent in alarming numbers. The seizure of 2,200 pounds of tiger bone (from about 80 tigers) in Delhi in August 1993 made it obvious what was happening: Poaching for the Chinese medicinal trade (that used tigers parts as prime ingredients) had hit the subcontinent.
But it was worse than that. This hunting bonanza coincided with a period of unbridled development after Indira’s son, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was voted out of office in 1991. “The plunder of India’s forests was in full swing,” remembers Valmik Thapar, one of the country’s premier tiger experts. “Laws, or no laws…it was all about greed.” Forests were razed, degraded and submerged beneath dam floodwaters, pillaged by mining projects and converted for industry and agriculture. Over the past two decades, the country lost a quarter of its wild lands."

How is this even contesting what I am saying? Where did I claim that habitat destruction wasn't a threat? All I am saying is that poaching is a more immediate one (which your quote above corroborates) while habitat destruction a more long term. That's why I gave you the example of Manas and Simlipal and other unprotected 'protected areas', tiger habitats devoid of tigers. My point was simple- tigers will die long before their habitat is completely destroyed, if they aren't given proper protection. That in no way implies that habitat isn't being destroyed. 

You didn't anwser my question- Manas has more space than kazi, why doesn't it have more tigers then? Russia has even more space, why does it only have 400 tigers? What drove the siberian tiger to the brink of extinction?

Why were wolves pushed to near extinction in the US? Was it because their habitat was destroyed or because they were hunted incessantly?

Ideally, we would want to protect tigers and their habitat in equal measure, but we don't live in an ideal world. The immediate concerns always take priority.


And Why won't I read those articles? Simple. I have been reading them ever since I was a kid. I have read them before and I am not going to read them again. These appeared regularly in Indian media, far before the western media and long before the dawn of the internet. In the era of print media. When the quality of reporting was better.

There are some good India based environmental media outlets, like the down to earth and sanctuary asia magazines. You should check them out if you want to learn more about issues facing nature and wildlife in India.

My last post on this topic. Reply