Goa Government Strongly Opposes CEC Tiger Reserve Recommendations in Supreme Court
The Goa state government has submitted a detailed affidavit to the Supreme Court of India, vehemently opposing the recommendations made by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) regarding the declaration of a tiger reserve in the state. In its official submission, the government has labeled the CEC report as "erroneous" and "vague," arguing that it lacks proper scientific, legal, and ecological justification and should therefore not be considered by the court.
Affidavit Highlights Lack of Scientific Basis and Local Awareness
The affidavit, filed by K Ramesh Kumar, IFS, who serves as the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden on behalf of the state government, makes several critical points. It asserts that the CEC failed to conduct a meaningful exercise to ascertain the presence of a tiger population, whether permanent or transient, in the Cotigao-Mhadei forest complex. According to the state, this inquiry is fundamental to the entire issue referred to the CEC.
"The CEC proceeded on an erroneous premise by focusing on the population of local inhabitants rather than first determining the existence and status of the tiger population," the affidavit states. It further emphasizes that the CEC's recommendations are primarily aimed at protecting the already existing tiger population in the Kali Tiger Reserve in neighboring Karnataka, rather than addressing the specific situation in Goa.
State Argues Existing Protections Are Sufficient
Goa's position is clear: the state's protected areas, including wildlife sanctuaries and national parks, are already being scientifically managed and provide comprehensive protection for all species, including tigers. The government contends that these areas serve as an excellent corridor for tiger movement between Karnataka and Maharashtra, a fact it claims the CEC overlooked.
"Goa's wildlife sanctuaries and national park ensure and accord an excellent corridor for tiger movement between Karnataka and Maharashtra, which the CEC failed to note," the affidavit highlights. It argues that tigers from the Kali Tiger Reserve are merely transient visitors to Goa's protected areas and "do not reside or use the areas for breeding activities."
Concerns Over Local Impact and Superfluous Declaration
The state government raises significant concerns about the potential negative consequences of declaring a tiger reserve in Goa. It warns that such a move would be superfluous and could lead to several issues, including:
- Resentment from local inhabitants towards resettlement
- An increase in man-animal conflicts
- Unnecessary administrative and ecological disruptions
"Given the lack of resident and breeding tigers, the mere presence of a few transient tigers passing through the area does not, by itself, necessitate declaring the area as a tiger reserve," the affidavit asserts. It points out that the protections already afforded under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 are sufficient to safeguard the transit of tigers and other animals.
State Seeks Autonomy in Decision-Making
In its submission, the Goa government has urged the Supreme Court to allow the state to retain autonomy over decisions regarding the inclusion and exclusion of areas as tiger reserves. It argues that the state has a full awareness of localised challenges and the extent of habitation, making it better positioned to make informed decisions than a central committee.
The affidavit concludes by reiterating that the CEC report is fundamentally flawed and should not be acted upon, emphasizing that Goa's existing conservation framework is robust and effective without the need for additional tiger reserve status.
