Skip to main content

Karnataka tribal network opposes capitalist, 'neo-colonial' conservation practices

Counterview Desk 

Community Network Against Protected Areas (CNAPA), a newly formed group of community networks consisting of people’s movements and groups resisting colonial conservation, recently organised a week-long padayatra of the indigenous communities of Nagarhole, Karnataka, to protest against the manner in which community lands and forests have been forcibly grabbed to create a tiger reserve.
The padyatra, in which Adivasi community leaders from nearly 12 protected areas and states participated, took place from 15th to 20th March 2023 and arrived in front of the Forest Department office of Nagarhole tiger reserve on 20th March 2023. 
Following the week long event, CNAPA came up with a concept note criticising what it called “global capitalistic conservation model” based on “neo-colonial conservation practices of the national authorities”.

Text:

India’s conservation policy has created long-standing conflicts of who is first - people or animals? The conservation policy and practice that forest departments, wildlife bureaucracy, urban conservationists and the majority of wildlife conservation NGOs pursue across India is rooted in the exclusionary idea of ‘fortress conservation’ - a colonial model of protecting wildlife through the creation of inviolate areas of ‘wilderness.’ Hence, this policy continues to wage capitalist, brahminical and patriarchal dominance over Adivasis/ Scheduled Tribes, pastoralists, fisherfolks and other forest-dwelling communities. This hegemonic model continues to visualise and propagate a dangerous myth that the relationship between wildlife and humans is separate and isolated, therefore forcing policy moves such as the creation of more and more protected areas (PAs), including wildlife sanctuaries, national parks and tiger reserves.
The mushrooming of PAs in India - from one, i.e. Jim Corbett National Park in 1936, to a vast network of 998 PAs is the stark result of this fortress idea of conservation. Furthermore, the proposed upscaling of PAs areas under Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (30% by 2030 target) is another sinister move by the international conservation industry/lobby and the neoliberal Indian state to oust the indigenous people and local communities from their ancestral homelands in the name of conservation. This green colonisation, disguised as ‘biodiversity conservation’, which has been destroying the lives, livelihoods and ethno-ecological lifeworlds of thousands of communities through eviction, is now opting for heavy militarisation of the so-called PAs by unilaterally declaring these as ‘eco-sensitive zones’. The concept of PAs has today become a means to annex forest commons, agricultural lands, water sources, etc belonging to Adivasi/Tribal and other forest-dwelling communities. Thus this neo-colonial attitude of the government has had a devastating impact on the forest dwelling indigenous and other marginalised communities.

Debunking Protected Areas

The declaration of these PAs has led to thousands of Adivasi/Tribal and other communities getting evicted and displaced ‘forcefully’ for a ‘relocation package’ which includes cash compensation and facilities like house, access to health and education infrastructure offered by the forest departments or National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) under the government of India. Several communities have been protesting and resisting this for years and many community experiences have brought to light that the evictions are in no way ‘voluntary relocations’ but rather are ‘coerced and forced relocations.’ This imposition of PAs on communities is a violation of constitutional rights vested in Gram Sabhas and forest rights committees (FRCs). In many instances, the forest department, along with the wildlife and forest conservation lobby (NGOs and bureaucracy) have played a sinister role in harassing families and community leaders mobilizing against their community’s displacement. Many Adivasi/Tribal leaders have been slapped with false cases, many have been murdered and some tortured and forced to accept these relocation packages by the forest department and NTCA authorities. There is much evidence of how Adivasi/Tribal people are made scapegoats in wildlife poaching cases while organised syndicates of poachers have managed to escape scot-free with the help of politicians and the forest department.
Once forced out of their ancestral forests, the situation of such displaced communities across India is appalling with community elders dying within two-three years of separation from their original habitats. Most youth and men get addicted to alcohol and women are forced to work as daily wage labourers in construction sites, coffee/tea plantations or nearby towns for survival. For example, members of the Jenu Kuruba community from Bhogepura village, who were forcefully relocated, staged a protest last year as their access to their sacred spaces within the forests was being curtailed. In similar other instances. ‘relocated’ families living on the periphery of PAs like in Achanakmar (Chhattisgarh) or in settlements nearly 50-70 km away from their original lands like in Similiapal (Odisha) or Nagarhole (Karnataka) are restricted from collecting anything from inside PAs, including fuelwood. Communities who live adjacent to PAs and need access to those forests for livelihood are also stopped from going in. These violations have pushed forest communities into an abyss of injustice and exploitation.

Militarisation of Conservation with Impunity

The racist enterprise of conservation has always assumed the Adivasis and local communities as obstacles to wildlife conservation and their nature-based livelihoods and cultural practices have been demonised and treated as something that needs to be annihilated for the ‘nature’ to flourish. This romanticised understanding of nature or biodiversity is now resulting in local people being shot, implicated in false cases, beaten up and killed by park rangers, the Rhino Protection Force, the Special Tiger Protection Force in Kaziranga(Assam), Nagarhole (Karnataka), Similipal (Odisha) and Sundarbans over the years. Kaziranga National Park, which conservationists have often touted as a good-practices model for wildlife conservation in India, has blatantly militarised its park management strategies with its “shoot-at-sight” policy. This eco-fascism is in many ways similar to Salwa Judum (state-sponsored militia consisting of local Adivasi youths who received incentives and are given arms training by para-military) which India’s top court ruled illegal. This growing trend of militarized conservation approach has converted many wildlife reserves in India into war zones wherein local communities and Adivasi peoples are often caught in the crossfire between park managers and poachers/loggers.

Community Forest Rights

Claims made by communities living inside PAs for community forest rights (CFR), community forest resource rights (CFRR) and Habitat Rights under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, have been deliberately ignored by authorities across India. This is glaring in cases where the villages had already been marked for relocation by the forest departments, national park managers and NTCA- the central body that funds and regulates Project Tiger in India. This is a serious violation of not just FRA but also of the PESA Act of 1996 applicable in Schedule Areas. According to NTCA official data, 56,257 families have been evicted in 751 villages across 50 tiger reserves in India since the inception of the tiger project in 1972 by the government of India (Source: Report of All India Forum for Forest Movements, Nov 2021). Out of these nearly 44,000 families (i.e., 2,20,000 people) have been evicted and displaced without receiving ‘relocation packages.’ And organisations like WWF, WCS, Conservation International, Wildlife Protection Society of India, Wildlife Trust of India, and Wildlife First, among many others, are complicit in pushing governments to continue imposing a conservation model in forest regions that not only exclude Adivasi/Tribal and other forest dwelling communities but undermines the constitutional rights guaranteed to these communities under FRA and PESA.
The violations of people’s forest rights and right to community forest governance by the forest departmentconservation lobby-NGO cartel have a fourth constituent – the mining corporations. There is a significant overlap of tiger-bearing forests with mining concessions and the forest department has seldom filed objections to massive diversion of dense forest regions for different mining operations. But the forest bureaucracy, demonstrating unparalleled hypocrisy, has derailed or stalled constitutionally mandated recognition of CFR, CFRR and Habitat Rights of Adivasi/Tribal and other forest-dwelling communities in the name of protecting or conserving forest regions. It is important to underline that the relocation programmes run by NTCA are increasingly being financed from CAMPA money - money that mining companies deposit with the government in lieu of forest diversion, read destruction, required for their mining operations. Thus, the linkage between mining, deforestation, and eviction is part and parcel of the ‘fortress conservation model’ (parks without people) being pursued in India.

Conservation-Tourism Nexus

The opening up of national parks or Critical Tiger Habitat (CTH) for tourism calls into question the motives of coercing communities living inside forests to relocate out to other areas. This forced relocation is carried out, citing the designation of the area as CTH, when at the same time, tourism projects like eco-resorts, nature camps and safari trails are promoted, and housing complexes and forest rest houses are constructed inside CTHs for outsiders. It is clear that the conservation cartel is deliberately cutting the generations-old connection of Adivasis and other forest-dwelling communities from nature and wildlife through draconian laws like the Wildlife Protection Act and market-based programs like ecotourism is solely responsible for the erosion of local people's conservation ethos, knowledge systems and their customary resource management practices.
This is also counterproductive for achieving the goal of biodiversity conservation as the capitalist conservation paradigm values wildlife merely as an economic resource of the state or leisurely objects of the rich, and not as a part of local peoples' folk cultures. As tourism projects start growing inside PAs, there has been simultaneous growth of dangerous eco-engineering practices like forest regrowth through the planting of alien tree species and the introduction of exotic alien animals like cheetahs. There has been no in-depth study or research into the impacts of these alien trees and animals on the local flora and fauna and culture. In fact, while this conservationtourism nexus caters to the luxurious needs of tourists, photographers, politicians, bureaucrats and celebrities; forest people are branded encroachers in their own land and forced out to faraway resettlement colonies. And any resistance to these projects by Adivasis and other forest-dwelling communities results in their criminalisation and erosion of their human and civil liberties through policing, militarisation and weaponisation of the whole forest, commons and conservation landscapes.

Community Ownership of Forests and Commons

Adivasis communities and other forest-dwelling peoples have challenged and resisted the militarised fortress conservation projects that have appropriated their habitats. In many forest regions inclusive and community-led and owned conservation initiatives have shown that colonial conservation models are violent and discriminatory and they do have alternatives. In several forest regions, people’s movements have challenged the cartel of forest departments, wildlife NGOs, conservationists and corporations by exposing their collaborative exploitation of various natural resources and black-marketing of wildlife parts. Nagarhole in Karnataka is one such forest region where community ownership of forests and commons by the Jenu Kurubas, Beta Kurubas, Yaravas and other forest-dwelling communities and their collective movement against the cartel has been happening despite innumerable instances of eviction, abuse, beating, slapping of false cases, etc on its community leaders. Every year the Nagarhole communities not only resist attempts at evicting them, but also those evicted earlier make attempts to go back to their ancestral villages for reclaiming their right to live inside Nagarhole in peaceful coexistence with wildlife, forests and commons, debunking the idea of protected areas.
Major demands of CNAPA, for the communities across India who have been fighting against illegal imposition of protected areas on their lands:
  • We wholeheartedly support and stand with the adivasi communities of Nagarhole and their protest against eviction, militarization, harassment.
  • Karnataka government should take immediate cognizance of the people's demands and stop evicting people and harassing them in the name of conservation.
  • The Chief Minister, forest minister and tribal welfare minister of Karnataka and all other states like Odisha, Tamilnadu, Kerala and Assam should immediately go before the people and listen to their concerns before the upcoming election.
  • Oppressive conservation NGOs like WWF, WCS, IUCN, WTI, IFAW should stop their anti-people activities across India.
  • FRA must be followed in true spirit and the entire conservation regime should rest in the hands of communities.
  • The militarization of the forest department should stop immediately. Demand for a judicial commission to enquire into all the atrocities and extra-judicial persecutions that happened in protected areas across India.
  • Adivasi and forest-dwelling communities deserve the right to self-determination and complete sovereignty over their land and forests. Eviction and the so-called voluntary resettlement from protected areas must stop and its big lie that it is being done voluntarily.
  • Extractive tourism industry like safari should stop immediately. Adivasi people's land and forest are not objects of recreation and luxury.
  • Land grabbing happened in the past for private coffee estates, tea gardens, resorts etc must be inquired into and adivasi people living in and around protected areas must be given back their ancestral land

Comments

TRENDING

From plagiarism to proxy exams: Galgotias and systemic failure in education

By Sandeep Pandey*   Shock is being expressed at Galgotias University being found presenting a Chinese-made robotic dog and a South Korean-made soccer-playing drone as its own creations at the recently held India AI Impact Summit 2026, a global event in New Delhi. Earlier, a UGC-listed journal had published a paper from the university titled “Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis,” which became the subject of widespread ridicule. Following the robotic dog controversy coming to light, the university has withdrawn the paper. These incidents are symptoms of deeper problems afflicting the Indian education system in general. Galgotias merely bit off more than it could chew.

Covishield controversy: How India ignored a warning voice during the pandemic

Dr Amitav Banerjee, MD *  It is a matter of pride for us that a person of Indian origin, presently Director of National Institute of Health, USA, is poised to take over one of the most powerful roles in public health. Professor Jay Bhattacharya, an Indian origin physician and a health economist, from Stanford University, USA, will be assuming the appointment of acting head of the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA. Bhattacharya would be leading two apex institutions in the field of public health which not only shape American health policies but act as bellwether globally.

The 'glass cliff' at Galgotias: How a university’s AI crisis became a gendered blame game

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan*  “She was not aware of the technical origins of the product and in her enthusiasm of being on camera, gave factually incorrect information.” These were the words used in the official press release by Galgotias University following the controversy at the AI Impact Summit in Delhi. The statement came across as defensive, petty, and deeply insensitive.

Growth without justice: The politics of wealth and the economics of hunger

By Vikas Meshram*  In modern history, few periods have displayed such a grotesque and contradictory picture of wealth as the present. On one side, a handful of individuals accumulate in a single year more wealth than the annual income of entire nations. On the other, nearly every fourth person in the world goes to bed hungry or half-fed.

Thali, COVID and academic credibility: All about the 2020 'pseudoscientific' Galgotias paper

By Jag Jivan   The first page image of the paper "Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis" published in the Journal of Molecular Pharmaceuticals and Regulatory Affairs , Vol. 2, Issue 2 (2020), has gone viral on social media in the wake of the controversy surrounding a Chinese robot presented by the Galgotias University as its original product at the just-concluded AI summit in Delhi . The resurfacing of the 2020 publication, authored by  Dharmendra Kumar , Galgotias University, has reignited debate over academic standards and scientific credibility.

Conversion laws and national identity: A Jesuit response response to the Hindutva narrative

By Rajiv Shah  A recent book, " Luminous Footprints: The Christian Impact on India ", authored by two Jesuit scholars, Dr. Lancy Lobo and Dr. Denzil Fernandes , seeks to counter the current dominant narrative on Indian Christians , which equates evangelisation with conversion, and education, health and the social services provided by Christians as meant to lure -- even force -- vulnerable sections into Christianity.

'Serious violation of international law': US pressure on Mexico to stop oil shipments to Cuba

By Vijay Prashad   In January 2026, US President Donald Trump declared Cuba to be an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to US security—a designation that allows the United States government to use sweeping economic restrictions traditionally reserved for national security adversaries. The US blockade against Cuba began in the 1960s, right after the Cuban Revolution of 1959 but has tightened over the years. Without any mandate from the United Nations Security Council—which permits sanctions under strict conditions—the United States has operated an illegal, unilateral blockade that tries to force countries from around the world to stop doing basic commerce with Cuba. The new restrictions focus on oil. The United States government has threatened tariffs and sanctions on any country that sells or transports oil to Cuba.

Development at what cost? The budget's blind spot for the environment

By Raj Kumar Sinha*  The historical ills in the relationship between capital and the environment have now manifested in areas commonly referred to as the "environmental crisis." This includes global warming, the destruction of the ozone layer, the devastation of tropical forests, mass mortality of fish, species extinction, loss of biodiversity, poison seeping into the atmosphere and food, desertification, shrinking water supplies, lack of clean water, and radioactive pollution. 

When a lake becomes real estate: The mismanagement of Hyderabad’s waterbodies

By Dr Mansee Bal Bhargava*  Misunderstood, misinterpreted and misguided governance and management of urban lakes in India —illustrated here through Hyderabad —demands urgent attention from Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), the political establishment, the judiciary, the builder–developer lobby, and most importantly, the citizens of Hyderabad. Fundamental misconceptions about urban lakes have shaped policies and practices that systematically misuse, abuse and ultimately erase them—often in the name of urban development.