A census operation is a rare opportunity for an ordinary person to be inside a forest. Not as a tourist, but actually working with the forest department and helping estimate the animal populations. I have been part of such exercises. After giving up my job as a technical writer for a software company in Bangalore, I began teaching in a school for adivasi children in Gudalur, where I grew up, close to the border of the Mudumalai wildlife sanctuary. Whenever I could, I would help in the conservation effort in the sanctuary.
One basic rule in a census is that you can't possibly see all the animals and count them. The forest department and conservation organisations only undertake statistical surveys to estimate animal densities. Though it is called a ‘tiger census’, it usually involves looking for a variety of things to estimate the various animal populations. Unless it’s a synchronised elephant census: since elephants are long ranging animals, the elephant census has to happen at the same time in all the connected forests (which involves Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh).
The whole of the Mudumalai forest is divided into 18 ‘beats’. These are comparatively smaller regions that use natural landmarks (like rivers, roads, ridges etc) as boundaries and are guarded by one forest watcher, one forest guard and one or more anti-poaching watchers (APW). For the census operations, one or two volunteers are assigned to each beat along with the existing team responsible for the area.
The census operation normally takes three days and starts in the evening with a training session by the wildlife warden and other members of the scientific community. The training covers the code of conduct, methods and approach to data collection (including details of the different surveys to be undertaken), what clothing should be worn, emergency information and an overview of the forests in Tamil Nadu. Early next morning people are dropped off on their beats with a packet of food.
The surveys undertaken in a census are:
Carnivore signs: Since seeing carnivores is quite rare, we have to look for signs of them such as kills (carcasses), scrap marks, rake marks, pug marks and scat (shit). Whenever a sign is found it must be filled into the given form along with the time and place. Pug marks are one of the most important tiger signs, and often casts are taken in plaster of paris. Experienced forest staff can often distinguish individual tigers based on the shape of the paw.
Line transect: These are lines either two or four kilometres long, drawn on the map and then physically cleared through the forest at intervals. The main purpose is to note the animals seen along these lines. One person walks along the line and on every sighting notes the perpendicular distance from the line, the species and number of animals. Based on the number of animals seen along these specified lines, the overall population can be estimated for each species. So, even not seeing anything is important data. It is also important that all the groups carry out the transect sighting at the same time of the day.
The transect lines are also used for other studies like elephant dung count and herbivore pellet count. The dung count involves one person walking along the line and making a note of each pile of elephant dung seen on either side of the line. We also had to note the perpendicular distance from the line, and the state of decomposition or approximate age of the dung. Using this information and also known facts like the speed at which elephant herds normally move through the forests, and the number of times each animal defecates a day, we get an estimate of the elephant population.
The pellet count is carried out every four hundred meters along the transect line. We had to mark out a 40 square meter area and count all the pellets we found in that area. This included the number of pellets of each different species and was quite a tiresome process as it was often in the range of 200-500 pellets.
On the first day the task was to look for carnivore signs (and sightings if you were lucky!). The groups started off at 6 am and continued till about 5 in the evening and were expected to walk 12-16 km through the respective beats looking for these signs. On the second day, things started with ungulate (hoofed animals) encounters along the transect line. This did not take much time - about two to four hours depending on the line. The rest of the day was again spent looking for carnivore signs.
The third day was much shorter - we finished off by lunch time - and only involved work along the transect line. This started off with an ungulate encounter, but on the way back, we had to do a pellet and elephant dung count, and this was a lot more work as there are often in excess 150 piles of elephant dung and a few thousand pellets!
Guardians of our forests
Though India has done a reasonably good job of preserving forest cover and wildlife, we still have a host of problems on our hands. One of the most serious problems is the guards and watchers of the forest department. In some cases they are from local areas and/or have a reasonable interest and knowledge of forests, in which case things go quite well and are interesting. Sometimes, however, people who have only been involved in social forestry and have never in their lives encountered wild animals are transferred to these areas. Though they undergo some training, they are absolutely clueless, and it is often dangerous to be walking through the forest with them. On two occasions now such people have been part of our team. Both were close to retirement and had spent all their lives (by their own admission) looking after eucalyptus trees. Shankaran held us up for half an hour in the morning because he got very worked up and scared when a leech bit him. Then, he saw two bears running off and thought they were baby elephants. And he kept talking on his mobile phone, chasing off everything before we had a chance to get close. He also had no clue that elephants were dangerous and could kill people.
Normally, though, the APW (if he is an adivasi) is very knowledgeable, and if it were not for Ravi (the APW who accompanied us on an elephant census once) we may have all got killed by a herd of elephants. The herd was ambling down a bend in a forest path while we were going up the path, and we were destined to bump into each other at the corner. Our good friend Shankaran was happily chatting with his son in Tiruvanamalai at full volume. The elephants heard us first and stopped, but we kept walking till it was almost too late. Ravi thought he heard something and signalled us to stop. One of the young males in the herd charged, but Ravi was able to guide us out of the way and divert the young male just in time.
The APWs really have excellent knowledge of their beats. On the first day of an elephant census, for example, Ravi told me in the morning that there were no elephants in our beat, so we just walked around aimlessly all day to keep the guard happy. On the morning of the second day, we walked by a river for about half a kilometre and Ravi said two herds had crossed into our beat. By 9 am he took us to both herds, and we were done for the day.
What bothers me is that there are a large number of adivasis who are struggling to make a living on the outskirts of the forests, and who would make brilliant guards and watchers. Like Ravi. He is a Bettakurumba and for over 20 years now he has been working on the fringes of the forest department as an anti-poaching watcher. He is not a permanent employee but is hired temporarily if there is extra work, yet his knowledge of the forests is tremendous. No outsider, not the DFO or wildlife warden or even any of the scientific researchers ever enter the forests without an adivasi like him leading the way. In spite of this, the adivasi community is still not given prominence in the forest department. A few of the lucky ones manage to get in, but they are still a tiny minority.
Impractical methods
Another problem with the estimation of animal populations is that the people who devise these statistical methods are not the ones actually carrying out the surveys. So, at times, the methods are not practical or even possible. In the dung count, for example, we can't possibly get to every dung pile and measure the exact distance from the transect line. The dung is often in the middle of thick lantana or bamboo. So we can only look at it and make a rough estimate. But we are forced to write down a very exact figure – 4.56 metres – as the guards have strict instructions to be accurate to the last centimetre.
Also, the transect lines have to be absolutely straight for this method to work reasonably well, but in reality they are often animal paths, and are very winding. I don't know what effect this would have in the larger picture, as the errors could possibly get multiplied.
The pellet count is also unreasonable for two reasons. One reason is that since the transect is used as an animal path, it will have a much higher density of droppings than an average random area in the forest. Second, it is almost impossible to get a clear 40 sq m area in the forest. It is so full of lantana and other undergrowth that it is impossible to accurately count the pellets in the area. Again, rough estimates are to be made.
Because of the lack of practicality in some aspects of these studies, the guards and watchers don't take it seriously at all, and are very careless about the way in which they collect data. No one invests time and energy in actually making sure they understand the significance of conserving our forests or monitoring the health of animal populations. Every now and then some 'class' or 'training' is given them, but that does not really mean anything. To most of them it is just a job like any other, and a lot more has to be done to get them motivated about their work.
Despite all the problems, though, there is still hope. The calibre of people at the IFS (Indian Forest Service) level is very different. They are very aware of the larger picture in conservation are often keen on making a difference. Corruption and bureaucracy are still definite problems, but things are improving. A very motivated warden can really turn things around and make a lot of lasting changes.
There are also some very dedicated people in the scientific community working on the ground. They are aware of the problems with the existing statistical methods and are constantly improving them and making them more accurate. Ashok Kumar, for example, working with the Bombay Natural History Society, has been constantly streamlining the elephant dung count method and has almost perfected it. Mohanraj of the World Wildlife Fund is very well respected by the forest department staff, and they gain tremendously from his experience and knowledge.
|
