1

PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE OUTSIDE PROTECTED AREAS

WITH REFERENCE TO DESERT DISTRICTS OF RAJASTHAN

UDAY SHANKAR ( IFS) 96

CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, RAJASTHAN EMAIL : udaysh@yahoo.com

Abstract : One of the issues that has been raised is the importance of conserving endangered species other than large mammals like the tiger. The government initiated a new Centrally Sponsored Scheme’ Assistance for the Development of National Parks and Sanctuaries' entitled Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats to focus, among other things, on the need to ensure better protection of wildlife outside the protected areas and initiate recovery programmes for saving critically endangered species

To ensure better protection of the wildlife, and critically-endangered species and habitats in and outside protected areas, the centrally-sponsored scheme, 'Assistance for the Development of National Parks and Sanctuaries' has been modified during the 11th five-year plan period to address the new generation issues facing wildlife conservation.

The scheme has now been named as the 'Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats,' and has been made operational by adding more components and activities and widening the scope of conservation interventions.

KEY WORDS : Outside protected areas, National wildlife action plan, integrated

development of wildlife habitats, man animal conflict.

INTRODUCTION

Inspite of numerous protected areas in India, the wildlife is facing many problems in

terms of survival by way of habitat loss, human invasion of inviolate spaces and

developmental related activities obstructing the natural corridors of migrating animals. In

India, there is no particular definition for a protected area; any area that is considered by the

central government or state government to be important for conservation is designated a

status under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and is then legally considered a protected

area. Until 2002, the WLPA only had two main types of protected areas, National parks and

wildlife sanctuaries. An amendment to the Act in 2002 included two more categories -

2

conservation reserves and community reserves. A further amendment in 2006 added another

category called the tiger reserve.

Wildlife is well protected within these Protected Areas (PAs) by the umbrella Wild

Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the respective wildlife laws of the State governments. The

scheduled Species of wild fauna and flora also enjoy the protection even if they are outside

the PAs. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Biodiversity Act, 2002 aid in

overall protection of the environment and conservation of biodiversity respectively. With all

these laws in hand, wildlife management is difficult even in PAs because of pressures of

grazing of livestock, encroachments, poaching, extraction of Non Timber Forest Produce

(NTFP), and religious gatherings by local people. Outside the PAs the situation is alarming,

since most of the wild populations like spotted deer, Chinkara, black buck, Indian hare, wild

boar venture out of forests are falling prey to local people or poachers. Leopard, tiger, sloth

bear, wolf, jackal, hyena etc. are also persecuted because people feel they have to kill them to

protect themselves. To protect the wildlife outside PAs, the Governments should undertake

measures which would be beneficial to wildlife and people.

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY USED

The issue of management of wildlife outside PAs is studied by understanding the

legal provisions related to wildlife in WPA, 1972 and the information gathering through

visiting the websites of Ministry of Environment and Forests, Rajasthan forest department,

referring to Scholarly articles relating to management of wildlife outside PAs. The

information received from the office of Chief Wildlife Warden, Rajasthan state is also

incorporated in the study. Besides, some case studies from various states regarding

community conservation with examples are also discussed in the paper. The views and

3

opinions of various forest officers debating this issue in various forums have been also

incorporated.

PROTECTED AREA NETWORK: A NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE AND

BACKGROUNDER

As per present pattern in the country protected area can be categorized in following five types

according to the intensity and differential focus of management :

1. National park: Chapter IV Section 35 (1) of the WLPA

2. Wildlife sanctuary: Chapter IV Section 18 (1) of the WLPA

3. Conservation reserve: Section 36A (I) of the WLPA

4. Community reserve: Section 36C of the WLPA

5. Tiger reserve: Section 38V (4) of the WLPA

Apart from the protected areas mentioned in the WLPA, the Scheduled Tribes and Other

Forest-Dwellers (Recognition of Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA) provides for the creation of a

stricter category within existing protected areas, called critical wildlife habitat (CWH).

According to Section 2(b), Section 4 (2) (a-f) of the FRA, Critical wildlife habitats are such

areas of national parks and sanctuaries that are required to be kept inviolate for the purposes

of wildlife conservation.

The various activities allowed in these protected areas is given in the table no. 1

Table no. 1: Categories of PAs in India and their differences

PAs

Issues

National

parks

Wildlife

sanctuaries

Conservation

reserves

Community

reserves

Tiger

reserves

Critical

wildlife

habitats Protection

category

Very strict

protection from all

human

Strict, but

allowing some human activity

Strict for activities

negatively impacting conservation

objectives, but do not

Strict for activities

negatively impacting conservation

objectives, but do

Very strict

protection from all human

activity

Very strict

protection from all human

activity

4

activity impact human use not impact human

use

Management

and governance

Chief Wildlife

Warden,

forest department

Chief Wildlife Warden, forest

department

Conservation Management

Committee

(representatives from the forest department,

one representative

from each panchayat, one representative

each from

Department of Agriculture and

Animal Husbandry

Community Reserve

Management

Committee (five representatives from

the village

panchayat, one representative from

the forest

department)

Forest department

Forest department

Human

settlements

Not allowed

Allowed Allowed Allowed Interpreted by the forest

department as

not allowed in

the core

interpreted by the forest

department as

not allowed

Rights to forest

resources

Not

allowed

If cannot be

settled and/or

alternatives cannot be

provided, then

allowed

Allowed Allowed interpreted by

the forest

department as not allowed

interpreted by

the forest

department as not allowed

The various categories of protected areas in India is given in the Table no 2

Table No 2: Protected area network in India

Protected Areas Number Area % of geographical area

National Parks 102 40074.78 km2 1.22 %

Sanctuaries 520 1,22867.34 km2 3.74%

Conservation Reserves 57 2017.94km2 0.06 %

Community Reserves 4 20.69 km2 0.0 %

683 164980.75 km2 5.02 %

Source: ENVIS Center on Wildlife and Protected areas

Inspite of many numbers of legally protected areas, the area is just 5.02%. On the

other hand the agricultural land (% of land area) in India was 60.53 in 2009, according to a

World Bank report, published in 2010. The population of India stood at 121 crores according

to 2011 census which means there is a tremendous pressure on the land for resources.

Protected areas scenario in Rajasthan

Rajasthan is the largest state of India having 32 districts. The forests of Rajasthan

cover an area of 32,638.74 sq. km which is 9.54% of the total geographical area of the state.

5

They are spread unequally in northern, southern, eastern and south-eastern parts. There are 3

national parks, 25 sanctuaries and 4 conservation reserves.

The wildlife populations in the state of Rajasthan are presented in the table below.

Rajasthan state having many PAs is teeming with wildlife which is not only confined

to the National Parks and Sanctuaries but more of them are confined to the areas outside PAs

barring the tiger populations. Table No. 3 obtained from the website of Rajasthan Forest

Department, wildlife wing gives the data of the wild animal populations in and outside PAs.

Table No. 3

PRESENT PROBLEM SCENARIO

The above table tells that the state of Rajasthan is rich in wildlife and the considerable

numbers of wild life outside the protected areas are always in conflict with the humans and

livestock. This is one of the biggest problems the forest department is facing in Rajasthan.

Wild animals especially tiger, leopard, sloth bear, striped hyena, jackal, wolf are in direct

6

conflict with people. Animals like wild boar, sambar, nilgai, chital etc. raid the crops

surrounding the forests and face the ire of farmers.

Considerable number of animals and bird species always inhabit human dominated land

scapes due to which they are under constant threat from the people and the stray dogs. The

various problems of the animals living outside the protected areas are

1. Killing/ injury of humans and livestock by carnivores like tiger, leopard, sloth bear,

wolf, jackal etc.

2. Poaching of black buck, Chinkara, peacock, jungle fowl, grey francolin, Indian hares

etc. for pot / bush meat

3. Retaliatory killing of animals mainly tigers , leopards, sloth bears, wolves, jackals by

people outside PAs

4. Stray dogs injuring and killing black buck, Chinkara, peacock all-round the year

5. Loss of corridors in case of tiger reserves like Sariska and Ranthambhore where the

animals stray out and are in direct conflict with the livestock and people

The protected areas in Rajasthan are porous and the boundaries often are breached by local

people who enter the forests for grazing, fuel wood collection, and others minor forest

produce collection. Many villages inside the PAs are the reasons for human wildlife conflict

and the religious tourism in the parks is aggravating the situation day by day. The various

reasons stated for the man animal conflict are

1. Villages inside and surrounding the protected areas

2. Wild animal depredation into human habitats

3. Mob and unruly behavior of people

7

4. Lack of preparedness in the forest department to tackle the man animal conflict

situations

5. Small size of the protected areas

6. Negative attitude of people towards forest department

As per government records of forest department of Rajasthan , following table no. 4

and 5 depicts the extent of recorded conflicts and damage to livestock.

Table 4: Human wild life conflict

S.no year Loss of human life Permanent

incapacitation

Temporary

incapacitation

Total ex-

gratia paid

No. of

cases

Ex-gratia

paid

No. of

cases

Ex-gratia

paid

No. of

cases

Ex-gratia

paid

(in lacs)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 2009-10 5 05.00 3 1.50 48 2.45 08.95

2 2010-11 2 02.00 3 1.50 37 3.17 06.67

3 2011-12 7 14.00 0 0 19 2.04 16.04

4 2012-13 4 08.00 0 0 27 5.50 13.50

18 29.00 6 03.00 131 13.16 45.16

Table 5: wildlife damage to Livestock

S.no year Buffalo

and Ox

killed

Cows

killed

Calves of buffalo

and cow killed

Goats and sheep

killed

Ex- gratia paid

(in lacs)

No. of

cases

No. of

cases

No. of cases No. of cases

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 2009-10 22 82 8 86 3.08

2 2010-11 22 72 10 81 2.87

3 2011-12 14 59 8 76 5.21

4 2012-13 11 45 16 49 4.16

69 258 42 292 15.32

PRESENT APPROACH : SPECIES RECOVERY BASED AND AREA SPECIPIC

Great Indian Bustard conservation at landscape level (Species Recovery base)

The endemic great Indian bustard (GIB) is under threat of extinction and the largest

population of 100–125 birds exists in Jaisalmer, Barmer, Ajmer and Bikaner districts of

Rajasthan. A landscape conservation strategy using conservation/community re-serve concept

8

that includes controlled traditional land uses with GIB-friendly infrastructural development is

needed.GIB requires a landscape level conservation policy. Its habitat occurs in areas where

human-induced changes in the landscape are most rapid due to intensive agriculture and

industrialization, making it difficult to create protected areas that encompass GIB landscapes.

Moreover, some form of traditional land uses like dry farming and controlled grazing are

beneficial to GIB. Thus, its conservation is not entirely incompatible with some forms of

human use of the landscape which requires minimal infrastructural development.

GIB-friendly grassland management regime will benefit local communities in the long

run as it will enhance productivity for livestock and prevent overgrazing. A major threat

today to bustard habitat is not so much from pastoral use of GIB landscape but rather its

conversion to other land uses such as intensive agriculture and industry, along with their

associated infrastructural developments. Such land use changes rarely benefit local

communities, and therefore it will be relatively easy to bring in reforms which are both

economically beneficial for local people, as well as being GIB friendly. Appropriate

incentive-driven legislation and policy reforms have to be implemented in collaboration with

local NGOs to achieve this dual goal. Publicity and awareness campaigns should be taken up

to generate support among the local people A profitable and equitable mechanism to share

revenues generated from eco-tourism with local communities (Narain et al. 2005) may go a

long way in harnessing support for GIB conservation. Along with designing appropriate

conservation action plans, the restoring and managing of the grasslands or grazing lands by

promoting community institutions is seen as an effective step towards enhancing fodder

availability and quality in these areas, which in turn would create habitats for the Great Indian

Bustard.

9

Protection of wild life habitat in Desert areas of rajasthan ( Area Specific base)

Under the Centrally sponsored scheme,“National Wildlife Action Plan(2002-2016)”,

the state of Rajasthan has taken up a project named " Protection of wildlife habitats in desert

districts of Rajasthan funded by MoEF as a 100% central assistance. The name of the

component under the scheme is " protection of wildlife habitats outside protected areas" and

the data available for the year 2008-09 gives a description of the project. It covers the high

value biodiversity areas of ten desert districts of Rajasthan namely Jodhpur , Barmer ,

Jaisalmer, Jalore,Pali, Nagaur,Bikaner, Ganganagar, Hanumangarh and Churu and in

total 11890 villages. The biodiversity recovery programme envisaged supports six globally

threatened species namely, the great Indian bustard, lesser florican, houbara bustard, grey

wolf, chinkara and spiny tailed lizard. The funds provided for the same under state plan

from2004-05 to 2007-08 is to the tune of 21.97 lakhs.

There is an urgent need to provide necessaryinfrastructure facilities and deploy

adequate staff at strategic placesto protect the free roaming wild fauna. The plan for the year

2008-09 contained capital expenditure for preperation of biodiversity plan, development of

rescue and veterinary care center for wild fauna purchase of multiutility vehicles along with

ambulance and communication equipments. Construction and commissioning of guzzlers is

included in it.The recurring expenditure was on management and upkeep of wild faunain

drought prone areas and on awareness generation. Transportation of water, feed and fodder

during drought periods is included in the recurring expenditure. The multiutility vehicles ,

wireless and GPS sets will be used for patrolling the entire areas for protection of With

reference to the proposal from Chief Wild Life Warden Rajasthan, on integrated development

of wildlife habitats (component-Protection of wildlife outside Protected Areas)- Rajasthan,

the Government of India gave administrative/ financial approval for Rs 92.10 lakhs for the

10

above scheme for the year 2008-09. Various works have been proposed and have been

carried out in Bharatpur high value biodiversity area and Thar Desert high value biodiversity

area to facilitate conservation of biodiversity out of protected areas wildlife.

STRATEGY: INVOLVING PARTICIPATION OF STAKEHOLDERS IN

MANAGEMENT

As per the above table depicting increasing trend of man animal conflict due to habitat

shrinkage and various other social demographic factors , the present management needs to

rethink for protection of wild life beyond the contours of protected area. Since the above

conflict involves attitude of human being versus wild life along with economies of illegal

trade of wild life the management strategy need to have a societal approach with the

participation of wild life lovers of the society. There are umpteen examples where the Indian

/State government have taken steps towards the conservation of wild life and finally

concluded "Conservation cannot be imposed from above. Any conservation effort must

involve the local people, based on their interests, skills, self-reliance and traditions and

it must initiate programs that offer them spiritual and economic benefits." (Schaller,

1993).With the same spirit, in India there are communities where either they are carrying on

an age-old practice of regulated use, management of resources and protection of species and

habitats or have evolved such systems in recent times for a variety of reasons. Such areas

have become known as community conserved areas (CCAs). CCAs have been defined as

“natural and/or modified ecosystems containing significant biodiversity values, ecological

benefits and cultural values, voluntarily conserved by indigenous peoples and local

communities, both sedentary and mobile, through customary laws or other effective means”.

These include the protection of trees on which migratory and local birds roost and nest,

village irrigation tanks being used by wild birds and animals, coastal areas where youth

11

groups are involved in the protection of turtles and their nesting sites, forest areas being used

and protected by local people, parts of rivers where no fishing is allowed, and many more.

In most states, the community has come up with rules and regulations, and penalties

for anyone violating these. Usually, also, there is a system to protect the area, such as forest

protection committees, youth groups, wildlife protection groups, women’s committees, even

gram sabhas (village assembly) actively protecting the wildlife. Most importantly, strong

leadership from within the community, and often a supportive role from outside, has been

crucial in successful conservation by communities. At Khichan village (Rajasthan), villagers

provide safety and food to wintering populations of demoiselle cranes which flock there in

huge numbers of up to 10,000 birds (Pathak et al.,). In Goa, Kerala and Orissa, important

nesting sites for sea turtles such as Galjibag and Rushikulya and Devi beaches are being

protected through the action of local fisher folk and volunteers. Of the 2,240 sq. km stretch of

the Gori Ganga river basin in the upper mountains of Kumaon, 1,439 sq. km is under the

management of village van panchayats. This area forms an important corridor between the

Nandadevi Biosphere Reserve and the Askot Wildlife Sanctuary which are critically

important for highland biodiversity.

The Bishnois people living in western Rajasthan on the fringe of the Thar Desert,

have for centuries, been conserving the flora and fauna to the extent of sacrificing their lives

to protect the environment. For these nature-loving people, protection of the environment,

wildlife, and plants is a part and parcel of their sacred traditions. Almost every village in

Rajasthan has a gauchar where the Chinkara, spotted deer and black buck would feed and

people would not harm them. Andhra Pradesh is rich in nesting sites of water birds. In

Veerapuram village, painted storks, pelicans and black-headed ibis have been nesting since

time immemorial, at times exceeding 5,000 in numbers. Pedullupalle village of Cuddapah

district protects painted storks, white ibises, and cormorants, which have been nesting for

12

over a century. Nellapattu and Vedurapattu, in Nellore district, have been visited by open

billed storks, white ibis, and cranes since ancient times. Villagers in all these villages have

zealously looked after these birds and protected them from external threats. Due to its

ecological importance, Nellapattu was declared a wildlife sanctuary in 1997.

DISCUSSION OF ISSUES IN PERSPECTIVE OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS

The main challenges are even though the animal habitat within the PAs is being

scientifically managed, the lack of such attention in adjoining areas, is leading to

fragmentation of habitat and loss of animal corridors. While endangered species of wild

animal and birds are accorded full legal protection under national and international law and

conventions against such illegal hunting and from trade or commerce in their derivatives, it is

often a lack of effective organization and coordination between PA management and the

Forest Department machinery outside the PAs, which is responsible for the decline in their

numbers. A significant number of our wildlife populations, including that of many threatened

and endangered species, are found outside our Protected Area network, in areas including

Reserved Forests, Revenue Forests and Lands, Village Forests and commons, Private Forests

and Lands, and Community Areas. Such lands can also act as corridors, connecting wildlife

habitats. It is seen that such areas are extremely vulnerable both from the perspective of high

mortality of wildlife as also very high human-wildlife conflict. Forest Areas harboring

important wildlife species or identified as critical corridors, particularly those immediately in

the vicinity of PAs, should receive support on a priority basis for building capacity, including

appropriate infrastructure for wildlife protection in these areas. Working plans for Forest

Areas, especially those in the vicinity of PAs; usually do not give adequate significance to

wildlife conservation issues in their planning process. The Working Plan code prescribes that

13

all Working Plans are to have a section on wildlife conservation, which is to be developed

under the guidance of the Chief Wildlife Warden. This should be given due significance, and

not just as a matter of routine, so that the broader goals of maintaining landscape integrity

and viable populations of wildlife, as well as to reduce human-wildlife conflicts are

adequately addressed.

To address all the issues of protecting the wildlife outside the PAs, the Government of

India has come up with a Centrally Sponsored Scheme known as “National Wildlife Action

Plan(2002-2016)” with the objective to provide adequate protection to wildlife in multiple

use areas, such as farm lands, waste lands, wet lands, coastal habitat etc. that form corridors

linking up the protected areas and providing for genetic continuity between and among them.

Adopting and implementing strategies and needs outlined above will call for action covering

the following parameters:

RESULTS

The priority projects to be taken up to protect wildlife outside PAs would be

a) Evolving and prescribing guidelines for local community involvement in the

different Management zones of PAs and adjacent areas.

b) Initiating orientation programmes for PA staff and developing capacities to

implement developmental activities for the local people in a way compatible to

conservation.

c) Enhancing allocations for and strengthening the schemes in the forestry and wildlife

sector for community support through ecologically sound development.

14

d) Holding public hearings in affected areas around the PA once every year. These

should cover damage from wild animals to crops, livestock and human life as well

as adversity to wildlife from forest fires, excessive livestock grazing, encroachments

on forests or PA lands, illegal tree cutting and poaching. Planned prevention and

control measures should be implemented in participation with affected people as

interest groups. Staff, community and NGO based committees should be formed for

transparent and speedy assessment of damage and distribution of compensation.

e) Formulating schemes for conflict management, especially prevention and control of

crop/property damage and injury to or loss of human life, in all ongoing and new

wildlife schemes.

f) Making all relevant information on conservation policies and programmes publicly

accessible in local languages, well in time for a meaningful dialogue with local

people with the objective of conflict resolution.

g) Giving priority to the local communities in employment for various protection and

conservation works such as fire protection, road repair, improvement of habitat and

water and soil conservation measures.

h) Providing a range of incentives to conserve wildlife in different landscapes across

different land and water uses: rewards and public honor for commendable

conservation work and actions, granting of biomass and water resource rights for

personal consumption for communities that have helped protect or restore wildlife

habitats, employment in local conservation works, financial rewards and incentives

to protect sacred groves, share in penalties extracted from poachers, share in tourism

revenues, incentives to move away from ecologically ill-advised activities.

i) Encouraging people to help protect and take measures to manage wildlife habitats

outside PAs (including community conserved forests, wetlands, grasslands and

15

coastal areas) as these areas are often critical for wildlife, or as vital corridors that

link the PA Network.

j) Initiating orientation programmes for PA staff to build a positive attitude towards

local people and their rights.

k) Landscape level Planning and Management

Landscape level planning involving the forest department and people is the need of

the hour for effective conservation of wildlife in and outside PAs. A landscape can be

defined as a heterogeneous area comprised of a cluster of interacting ecosystems at

broad scales of space and time. In the conservation areas, landscapes are variously

comprised of four kinds of lands having a gradient of amount of government

management control that would help provide for biological diversity: (1) protected

areas such as national parks and wildlife sanctuaries, having natural conditions and

very strict management; (2) reserved forests having management as per the approved

working plans; (3) protected forests and community forests, having limited

management; and (4) private lands including agricultural fields, having little to no

government management (Marcot et al.,). Landscape planning for conservation of

biodiversity aims at developing and ultimately implementing management for such

lands in a consistent, integrated manner. The Landscape Area Plan is one of the

principle implications of the National Forest Policy of 1988 for achieving goals for

biological diversity. The following steps are described below as a general process for

producing a Landscape Area Plan. These steps are adapted from experience elsewhere

(Miller 1996) with integrated forest planning. Each of these steps should be carried

out in open consultation with local and regional leaders of human communities.

♦ Delineate Landscape Planning Area boundaries

16

♦ Collect relevant inventories

♦ Describe the current situation, major trends, resource potentials, and human use

needs.

♦ Establish overall multi-use goals

♦ Devise a reasonable array of alternatives to meet overall goals

CONCLUSION

Conservation of wildlife outside protected areas needs a holistic approach from the

Government, local people and NGOs. The conservation efforts should involve local people

with a sizeable flow of benefits to them coupled with active management initiatives from the

forest departments including management of habitats outside PAs and enabling animal

movement across landscapes by maintaining functional corridors. Timely compensation for

crop damage, loss of human life and livestock killings should be addressed immediately.

Spreading awareness about wildlife values and their role in balancing ecosystems to the

people at large is the responsibility of the forest department. The initiatives taken up under

National Wildlife Action Plan, 2002-16 in the desert districts in Rajasthan are in the right

direction for the protection of the wild animals outside PAs. Trained wildlife experts with

adequate rescue and rehabilitation centers and the goodwill of people towards wildlife would

certainly improve the situation in the ground level and protect the wildlife which have

strayed out of their habitats.

17

REFERENCES

1. Marcot, Bruce G., Martin G. Raphael, Richard S. Holthausen, and Vishwas B.

Sawarkar. "Concepts and Applications of Landscape Planning and

Management." Management of Forests in India for Biological Diversity and Forests

Productivity 1 (2002): 5.

2. Miller, K.R. 1996. BALANCING THE SCALES: Guidelines for Increasing

Biodiversity Chances through Bioregional Management. World Resource Institute.

pp.73

3. Narain S, Panwar HS, Gadgil M, and Thapar V, Singh S (2005) .The report of the

tiger task force: joining the dots. Report submitted to Union Ministry of Environment

and Forests. Government of India, Delhi.

4. National wildlife action plan from https://sanctuaryasia.com

5. Pathak Broome, N. and Dash, T. 2012. Recognition and Support of ICCAs in India.

In: Kothari, A. with Corrigan, C., Jonas, H., Neumann, A., and Shrumm, H. (Eds).

Recognizing and Supporting Territories and Areas Conserved By Indigenous Peoples

and Local Communities: Global Overview and National Case Studies. Secretariat of

the Convention on Biological Diversity, ICCA Consortium, Kalpavriksh, and Natural

Justice, Montreal, Canada. Technical Series no. 64.

6. Schaller, G.B. 1993. The Last Panda. University of Chicago Press, Chicago and

London. pp. 35.

7. Wildlife Life (Protection) Act, 1972

8. Annual report of Forest Department , Rajasthan

9. Forest Survey of India report

10. https://rajasthanforests.nic.in