Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 February 2020 | 12(3): 15301–15310
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893
(Print)
doi: https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5025.12.3.15301-15310
#5025 | Received 24 April 2019 | Final
received 06 January 2020 | Finally accepted 11 January 2020
Building walls around open wells
prevent Asiatic Lion Panthera leo persica (Mammalia:
Carnivora: Felidae) mortality in the Gir Lion
Landscape, Gujarat, India
Tithi Kagathara
1 & Erach
Bharucha 2
1,2 Bharati Vidyapeeth Institute of
Environment Education and Research, Bharati Vidyapeet
University, Dankawadi, Pune, Maharashtra 411002,
India.
1 tithi7k@gmail.com, 2 erach.bharucha@bvieer.edu.in
(corresponding author)
Abstract: The Asiatic Lion population has
increased in the last three decades, which now occupies a large regional spread
with six or more identified satellite populations in eight districts of
Gujarat. An overlap of lion habitat with
human-dominated landscape elements leads to an increase in lion-human
interactions in these growing satellite populations. A high rate of lion mortality has been
observed in the periphery of Gir in the last decade
due to falls into open dug wells. These
wells have been excavated for irrigation in the agricultural landscape of Gir. About 145 wild
animals including lions have died due to accidental falls into open wells in
past 10 years. It has been observed that
construction of parapet walls around wells in some of the peripheral areas of Gir Sanctuary have prevented this accidental mortality at
very low cost. To assess the efficiency
of these measures we did a survey of 20 random villages in the Gir Lion Landscape to collect data on the types of wells
that cause this uncalled-for mortality.
The paper explores the reasons for the lions falling into wells in the
agricultural areas outside the Gir Sanctuary. The survey has shown that the corridors used
by lions and in the satellite population areas are high risk sites where more
parapet walls should be built on a priority basis. From the year 2007 to 2018 more than 48,000
parapet walls have already been randomly built in the periphery of the Gir Sanctuary. Out
of 130 identified wells, 90 were protected with parapet wall or iron net while,
32 were without parapet wall and rest eight were with unfinished parapet
wall. Providing a scheme for building
more parapet walls around prioritized open wells would be an effective step
towards Asiatic Lion conservation in the Gir Lion
Landscape. Our survey indicates that
there has been no mortality of lions in those wells where parapet walls have
been built.
Keywords: Conservation, lion-human
interactions, mortality, parapet wall, satellite population.
Gujarati abstract: છેલ્લા ત્રણ દાયકામાં એશિયાઇ સિંહોની વસ્તીમાં વધારો થયો છે જે હવે ગુજરાતના આઠ જિલ્લાના અલગ અલગ વિસ્તારમાં વસવાટ કરે છે. ગીરમાં સિંહોનો વસવાટ મનુષ્ય સમાન હોવાથી તેઓ એકસાથે જોવા મળે છે. છેલ્લા 10 વર્ષમાં સિંહોનો મૃત્યુ આંક ખુલ્લા કુવાને લીધે ઘણો વધ્યો છે જે ગીર અભ્યારણ્યની ફરતે આવેલ છે. આ કુવાઓ ખેતીલાયક જમીનની પાણીની જરૂરિયાત માટે ખોદવામાં આવેલ છે. છેલ્લા 10 વર્ષમાં અંદાજીત 145 જંગલી પ્રાણીઓના ખુલ્લા કુવામાં પડી જવાથી મૃત્યુ નીપજ્યા છે. અધ્યયન પરથી જાણવા મળ્યુ છે કે ખુલ્લા કુવાને ફરતે પાળ/દિવાલ બાંધવાથી સિંહોના મૃત્યુદરમાં કેટલાંક અંશે ઘટાડો લાવી શકાય છે. આ સંભાવના ચકાસવા માટે અમે ગીર અભ્યારણ્યની આસપાસ આવેલ 20 ગામોમાં રેન્ડમલી સર્વે કર્યો હતો અને આ પેપરમાં સિંહોના ખુલ્લા કુવામાં પડવાના કારણો પર ચર્ચા કરી છે. સર્વે પરથી જાણવા મળ્યુ છે કે લાયન કોરીડોર અને સેટેલાઇટ પોપ્યુલેશન વિસ્તારોમાં સૌ પ્રથમ કુવા ફરતે પાળ બનાવવી જોઇએ. ગીર લાયન લેન્ડસ્કેપમાં 2007 થી 2018 સુધીમાં અંદાજીત 48000 કુવાઓને ફરતે દિવાલ બનાવાઇ છે. ડોક્યુમેન્ટેશન કરેલા કુલ 130 કુવાઓમાંથી 90 કુવાઓમાં દિવાલ હતી અને 32 કુવામાં કોઇપણ પ્રકારની દિવાલ ન હતી બાકીના 8 કુવાઓની દિવાલ અધુરી બનાવેલ હતી. “ ખુલ્લા કુવા ફરતે દિવાલ બનાવી” યોજના અંતર્ગત જો પ્રાયોરીટાઇઝ્ડ વિસ્તારોમાં અમલ કરવામાં આવે તો એ સિંહોના સંરક્ષણ માટે ખુબ જ મહત્વની સાબિત થાય. અમારા સર્વે મુજબ કોઇ સિહનુ મૃત્યુ એવા વિસ્તારમાં નથી થયુ જ્યાં કુવા ફરતે દિવાલ બનાવેલ છે.
Editor: L.A.K. Singh,
Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. Date of publication:
26 February 2020 (online & print)
Citation: Kagathara,
T. & E. Bharucha (2020). Building walls around open wells
prevent Asiatic Lion Panthera leo
persica (Mammalia: Carnivora: Felidae) mortality in
the Gir Lion Landscape, Gujarat, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 12(3): 15301–15310. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.5025.12.3.15301-15310
Copyright: © Kagathara
& Bharucha 2020. Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: Self-funded.
Competing interests: The authors
declare no competing interests.
Author details: Ms. Tithi Kagatara is a fellow at ‘Youth for India
fellowship’- SBI Foundation and working on the project with M S Swaminathan
Foundation (MSSRF) titled ‘NTFPs as a source of sustainable livelihood of
tribal people of Koraput, Odisha’. Dr. Erach Bharucha has worked in wildlife and biodiversity
conservation for over 40 years, has held several prestigious positions in the
wildlife sector both government and non-government organisations and has many
publications to his credit.
Author contribution: This study was a part of the MSc
dissertation of Tithi Kagatara
under guidance of Dr. Erach Bharucha. She has collected secondary data with the
help of Division officials of Gujarat Forest Department and with help of local
people. The primary data was collected
personally by visiting the 20 villages of Gir Lion
Landscape. EB conceptualized, designed
the research methodology and personally supervised the work and interacted with
local forest officials in the Gir landscape on the
value of this study, which was requested by the forest department of Gujarat.
For Gujarati abstract see
end of this article.
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank
the Gujarat Forest Department, especially the officers and staff of Junagarh
Wildlife Circle of Gir-East and Gir-West
divisions. Authors appreciate the help
of Dr. A.P. Singh (IFS) and Mr. Sanjaysingh
P. Sisodiya (IFS).
Authors are also thankful to all the local people who helped during the
data collection in the field.
INTRODUCTION
The population of Asiatic Lions
in India saw a decline in Gir Sanctuary before 1990s
(Singh 2017). Effective conservation,
however, saw an increase in numbers in the last 20 odd years. This was accompanied by a dispersal of their
population in more recent times. The
present home-range of the Asiatic Lion has spread across eight districts of the
Saurashtra region of Gujarat which is known as the Asiatic Lion Landscape or Gir Lion Landscape Gir Lion
Landscape (GLL) (Kumar & Pathan 2015).
The growing population is now expanding into suitable sub-optimal
pockets of habitats in the agricultural landscape and in river corridors (Jhala et al. 2009; Basu et al.
2012). The patches of satellite
population of Asiatic Lions are Girnar, Mitiyala, Lilia-Krankach-Savarkundala, Shetrunji-Jesor-Hippavadli,
southwestern coast, and southeastern coast of
southern Saurashtra (Singh 2000; Gujarat Forest Department 2015; Singh 2017)
(Figure 3). As lion population in
satellite areas increase, the human-lion interactions and their habitat
conditions is getting altered. Falling
into wells, getting hit by trains/vehicles, and accidental electrocution lead
to mortality of lions and other wild animals in the surrounding cultural landscape
(Banerjee & Jhala 2012). According to the statistics of the Gujarat
Forest Department (GFD), 30 lions have had accidental deaths due to falling
into open wells in the last 10 years.
There is a great need to prevent this unnecessary mortality through
tested conservation measures that should be implemented in high risk areas
where lions disperse outside the protected area (PA).
In 2007, the GFD began to
construct a few low-cost parapet walls around the wells for local farmers to
see if the innovative measure would prevent high level of accidental mortality
of lions and other wild animals. For several years, however, the GFD continued
to rescue a large number of lions at very high cost. If the scheme could be shown to be effective
as a preventive measure this would be of great conservation importance. Our study has indicated that parapet wall
construction around wells is a possible measure to prevent lion mortality. A public-private partnership (PPP) under the
eco-development program could be extended to such potentially hazardous
areas. In the periphery of Gir, there are more than 30,000 wells that have been
protected with parapet walls between 2007 and 2018. No careful study was done on the causes that
led to these accidents in unprotected wells, nor was a comprehensive survey
done on the benefits from this simple intervention.
The GFD provided INR 8,000 to
build each parapet wall under the eco-development program. For an estimated 30,000 wells in the larger
human dominated landscape, the total cost of parapet walls could be
approximately INR 240 million (Rs. 24 crore). It is impractical and costly to build a wall
around every well in the GLL by the forest department. Thus, the support of local people, GFD,
Gram-Panchayats, Biodiversity Management Committees under the Biodiversity Act
2002, and CSR funds from industry, would have to be generated. It would, however, be cost effective if sites
for building walls around open wells are focused on high risk areas. This should focus on lion movement corridors
and the identified resident or temporary satellite populations of lions outside
the Gir PA.
The entire initiative would be a preventive strategy in the agricultural
landscape outside the Gir Sanctuary to minimize
accidental mortality.
STUDY
AREA
The study area lies across the
peripheral areas of the Gir Sanctuary (Figure 1),
mainly to the east where satellite populations have taken residence and in the
west where lion dispersal has also been recorded. The study includes 20 villages outside the Gir PA. All the 130
visited farms to study the wells were in revenue land. Direct visits to these randomly selected
agricultural farms in known satellite areas and interviews with 102 farmers for
data collection were undertaken in this study in the high dispersal zone of
lions.
The four major districts of Gir Lion Landscape are Amreli, Junagadh, Gir-somnath, and Bhavnagar (Figure 1). The lions had already occupied the visited
villages in the study area 30 years back and the seasonal rivers of the study
area are frequently used as a corridors for lion movement across the landscape
(Figure 2).
METHODS
Gir East and West divisions outside
the Gir PA were used for data collection. Twenty villages of the GLL were randomly
identified for survey in known satellite area.
The primary data collection was based on questionnaire and interviews in
villages that comprised 14 villages in 10km periphery of Gir
Sanctuary and six villages from different known areas of satellite population
of lions in GLL were selected. The
survey included 120 respondents from the local farmers and other stakeholders
of rural society.
Data on lion dispersal and
accidental mortality in the study area was collected through semi-structured
questionnaires with the farmers. The 130
wells in these villages were identified and studied to observe their site and
local typological features. GPS reading
and photo documentation of wells were done to appreciate their visibility and
other features which contribute to the risk of accidental fall of the
lions. The data on the number of parapet
walls built and the wild animal mortality due to open wells was provided by the
division office of Dhari and Junagadh which are under
wildlife wing of the GFD.
Interviews of local stakeholders
The survey was conducted in all
randomly selected 20 villages. The
semi-structured interviews of local people in the villages ascertained people’s
views on the presence of lions and the reasons that they could attribute for
lions falling into the wells (Table 1).
Snowball technique was used for choosing respondents in each
village. A minimum number of five
respondents and a maximum of 15 stakeholders were interviewed per village in high
risk areas. Questions related to the
success of the scheme through which parapet walls were built, the typology of
wells, the lion presence and frequency of occurrence of prey species was
documented. The views of respondents on
how and why lions fall into wells was documented through a citizen science
approach, as they were conversant with lion behavior
over a long period of time.
The views of respondents on how
the mortality occurs was also done through open ended informal interactions
along with the brief questionnaire, which provided qualitative opinions that
revealed that the people have clear views on their observations of lions that
have fallen into wells in their area.
Field observation of well
typology
The wells in agricultural lands
which were visited were photographed and classified into specific risk related
typologies. The typology has different
implications for lion mortality prevention.
Well typology: classification and analysis
The types of wells were
classified on the visual and photographic appearance documented during these
field visits. A total of 130 photographs
of wells were taken with their GPS locations.
The vegetation and accessibility of the surroundings of the wells were
documented to identify possible causes of lion mortality in the open wells. The parapet walls around wells were either
square or circular with an average height of one meter. Of the 130 wells 29 were covered with
concrete or wire mesh. There were 32
open wells, of these 24 were surrounded by thick growth of plants and were thus
obscured from view.
According to the well typology (Figure
4), out of the 130 wells 90 were protected wells, 32 were unprotected open
wells and eight were inadequately maintained and classified as others. The 90 protected wells are surrounded by
one-meter high parapet walls or covered with different materials like a cement
slab, nylon or iron net, which are included in the protected wells category.
Parapet walls have been built around 61 wells observed in the survey. The 32 unprotected or open wells do not have
any protective cover around the well.
There is a high possibility of a wild animal including the lions falling
into these wells. In these 32 wells, 24
were difficult to see as they were heavily surrounded by shrubs, grasses, herbs
and trees which hide the well from view. There were eight wells which could be
identified from a far distance (about seven meter) which are categorized as
noticeable open wells. There were eight
wells with one side open while the other three sides were surrounded by a
parapet wall that means the walls were damaged, so are categorized as “other”
types of wells (Figure 4).
RESULTS
A major finding of the survey of
local residents shows that they have observed that lions fall into open wells
while chasing prey. This was observed by
10% of respondents who reported that accidental falls into the wells happens
mostly at night. They observed that
lions fall into wells particularly while chasing after blue bull or wild
boar. As the visibility of wells during
the night is relatively poor due to the surrounding thick vegetation there is a
high possibility that the prey jumps over the well while the lion suffers a
misadventure. According to farmers in
the periphery of the Gir, Blue Bull and Wild Boars
feed on and ruin their crops. These
species also fall into the open wells during crop raiding. According to the respondents, the Blue Bull Boselaphus tragocamelus
population has increased in the Gir in the past 10
years due to the absence of ‘naar’ (Gujarati: Wolf),
which used to prey on the calves and effectively controlled the herbivore
population. There are, however, no
wolves Canis lupus recorded in Gir at present and the population of Blue Bull continues to
increase. The Blue Bull population in
agricultural land is thus an indirect reason for lion mortality resulting from
falls into open wells while stalking their prey.
The periphery of the Gir PA is divided into four divisions. The construction of parapet walls around open
wells has been implemented in two divisions which are Gir
West and Gir East divisions. The data collection of 14 ranges of the study
area is within the immediate periphery of the Gir
Sanctuary. Building parapet walls around
open wells has been initiated since 2007 in different ranges (Table 2). Talala Taluka has
the highest number of wells with parapet walls. According to the GFD, the
villages of Gir West division have more protected
wells compared to Gir East.
Data on wild fauna mortality
provided by the GFD was analyzed which shows that
there is a high accidental mortality of lions over the past six years 2011–2017
(Figure 5). The data includes mortality
of several other wild species due to open wells.
Open wells are a risk not only
for lions but also other wild animals such as Leopard, wild ungulates
especially Blue Bulls. Blue Bulls formed
48% of the mortality, Leopards (28%) and lions (16%) (Figure 5).
During the survey 90% of the
farmers have reported that lions fall into wells while chasing Blue Bull as the
ungulate can jump over the well successfully whereas the lion may not be able
to do so as easily. This locally known
observation has, however, not been substantiated.
The sudden increase of lion
mortality due to falls into open wells after 2015 can be explained by the
increase in range of the lions outside the PA into agricultural landscapes
where there are a large number of open wells, and many of which are hidden by
vegetation (Figures 6 & 8). After
2010, the lion population started increasing outside the PA. In the last 25 years the number of lions
inside Gir PA increased by 89 individuals or 1.3 times, while outside the
PA the increase was by 150 or 9.8 times (Figure 7). Although the number of unprotected or open
well in the periphery of Gir Sanctuary have decreased
gradually (Figure 8), lion mortalities
outside Gir PA have continued due to higher
spill over of lion population out of the PA, and continued existence of
unprotected live wells. The number of
protected wells reflect fluctuating trend, that may be due to addition of new
constructions or disintegration due to lack of maintenance. Ultimately, the
number of protected wells have remained almost the same in 2016-17 as it was in
2007-8 (Figure 9).
The locations of frequent lion
movements as suggested by local people during survey includes following areas
(Figure 3):
Babara (Amreli) → Gagadiyo
River (tributary of Shetrunji River) → Shetrunji River → Sarmda Village
→ Fifad (Bhavnagar) → Palitana
Dam → Bhavnagar Coast
Gir East border → Dhai → Savar kundala
→ Liliya →Krankach
(Greater Gir) → Gariyadhar
Gir (East) border → Coastal region of Rajula and Jafrabad → Mahua → Jesar (Bhavnagar) → Palitana
Hills.
Local people have suggested the
names of the villages and rivers which lions frequently use as movement
corridors. These are potentially
high-risk areas where building parapet walls would be more beneficial to limit
accidental mortality.
The GLL comes under the semi-arid
biogeography zone 4B- The Gujarat-Rajwara Biotic
Province (Rodgers & Panwar 1988).
The rivers are mainly seasonal except those inside the sanctuary. According to a recent study, lions use rivers
as corridors (MoEFCC 2017). Green belts alongside the rivers are ideal
isolated forest patches for the lions (MoEFCC 2017) (Basu et al. 2012).
There are six known patches where satellite populations of lions are now
resident (Figure 3). These are situated
in agricultural land, river and tributaries, coastal areas, and foot hills in
scrublands, which are concentrated in satellite populations (Meena et al.
2014).
DISCUSSION
Lions have been moving outside
the sanctuary and establishing their territories (Basu
et al. 2012). The fragmented suboptimal
habitat patches in the matrix of cultural landscape elements where lions are
frequently observed by local people is an important aspect to be recognized and
managed appropriately (Dolrenry et al. 2014). The wells that have been provided with
parapet walls over the years are now beginning to age. Of the 90 wells with parapet walls studied
during the survey, eight require urgent repairs. As lions are moving further away from the
sanctuary, the GFD needs to build parapet walls in those areas where the
satellite populations have been recorded on a priority bases outside the Gir PA (Shankar 2017).
A better appreciation of movement corridors, reported by local residents
are other important areas for building parapets for wells.
The wells in the satellite
population areas have different vegetation patterns and geographic features
(Images 1–4). Even though they are
situated in the overall semi-arid biogeography zone they are hidden from view
by Prosopis juliflora and shrubs (Image
1). This is furthered due to changes in
the cultural landscape which is linked to agricultural practices such as
irrigation, human access, roads, and neo-urbanization (Bharucha
2017). The increasing population of
Blue Bulls and invasion of Prosopis juliflora needs
to be controlled as this hides the wells from view. The grassland of Bhavnagar (near Palitana) currently has less Prosopis juliflora compared to Krankach
of Amreli. Controlling the spread of Prosopis
and scrub around wells would reduce the risk of accidental falls of lions into
these hidden wells.
Cost analysis
The cost of building a parapet
wall is about INR 8,000–10,000 according to local respondents. The GFD had helped farmers and owners of
land to build parapet walls under the eco-development project after 2007. The excavation of a well costs about INR
150,000 (Rs. 1.5 lakh) depending on the site. Building a parapet wall around a well thus
requires a relatively low investment to be added to the cost of the well. This amount is approximately 5% of the total
cost. This must become a policy for all
new wells while sanctioning wells.
Saving a lion that has fallen
into a well is cost intensive, time consuming, and an important untoward event. It often requires middle term rehabilitation,
or even life time care. An unnecessary
preventable mortality of even a single lion is a serious biodiversity loss. People living in the cultural landscape
outside the wildlife sanctuary where lions have now begun to spread
spontaneously may be involved through local Biodiversity Management Committees
at the Panchayat level as an outcome of the Biodiversity Act, 2002. Communication, education, and public
awareness campaigns in the GLL may be initiated for lion conservation to comply
with Aichi Target 1. Supporting lion
conservation by building protected walls around the wells is now a proven and
tested measure (Pathak & Kothari 2013).
This would prevent the potential risk to lions and other wild animals
from accidental mortality for one particular noticeable cause. It may also prevent accidental death of
children and adults as several wells are not visible due to thick growth of
vegetation around them especially during the monsoon. Steps may also be taken for keeping the
surrounding of wells clear of weed growth and obstruction of visibility round
the year. The removal of the obstruction
from observing the edge of the wells may prevent lion mortality to some extent.
Prevention of lion mortality
Proper maintenance of wells in
the agricultural landscape prevents lions and other wild animal from accidental
mortality around the Gir PA. Clearing of vegetation surrounding the wells
after the monsoon period to improve visibility of the wells must be done
through the local Panchayat and the Biodiversity Management Committees. Removal of the obstruction from observing the
edge of the wells may prevent lion mortality to some extent. Building of parapets or covering wells with a
cement slab should be mandatory in the GLL as a part of rural development. No new wells should be permitted without
parapet walls or a concrete covering slab.
The walls should be built during excavation of the wells itself and
inspected periodically for breaches.
Rescue and rehabilitation aspects
A rescued lion loses its
territory to other lions without an aggressive fight because the rescued lion
has been kept in captivity before release and has lost hold over its
territory. Thus, after release it is
unable to take over its own territory (Kumar & Pathan 2018). This has been known to occur with both male
and female lions. If a lioness has cubs
and she is moved to a rescue center after falling
into a well, the mortality of her cubs is likely to be high. The mortality of cubs in Gir
is reported to be higher in the first six months of their life if their mother
is dead. Her cubs die because of hunger.
Mortality is also observed due to in-fights between the released and
resident lions (Pati & Vijayan 2002). It is
reported that a rehabilitated mother cannot produce milk for the cubs, if the
captivity period time has been over two weeks (Singh 2000). Thus, even if lions are rescued from the
wells, there are serious concerns about their rehabilitation in the wild.
CONCLUSION
Interactions with local observers
have suggested that the priority to build protective parapet walls should
include:
Peripheral area of the PA for
about 10km mainly in the southern fringe.
Known movement corridors of lions
which use tributaries of Shetrunji River where wells
are adjacent to villages in agricultural land.
Known pockets of satellite
populations which are 40 to 100 km away from the edge of the PA such as
southwestern Coast, southeastern Coast, Pania and its adjoining areas, Savarkundala-Lilia
and adjoining areas, Bhavnagar District and Girnar
Sanctuary to northern side of Gir.
The buffer has been identified
around the Gir Sanctuary, rivers and satellite
population areas of lions by the Gujarat Forest department. Ten kilometer
buffer around the Gir Sanctuary as well as the
satellite population areas of lions; while for the rivers, three kilometer buffer was identified with help of Arc MAP. Two kilometer
buffer area around the Gir sanctuary should be
prioritized for building parapet walls around wells due to frequent movement of
lions (Figure 2).
Reducing the risk of mortality of
an endangered species is a key to its long term survival. A simple measure to prevent mortality of the
lions in Gir which has been highly successful has
been to build parapet walls around open wells into which lions were frequently
suffering accidental deaths. The
positive attitude of local people towards the scheme of building these parapet
walls has also contributed towards preventing accidental mortality of other
wild fauna. This mitigation measure for
addressing lion-human interaction may be prioritized in high risk areas where
satellite populations of lions are present.
The completeness of information on risks identified and on current
movement patterns of lions across the GLL will need to be addressed with all
local stakeholders and the GFD. The
citizen science approaches of eliciting this information can be used to
appreciate where the wells should be developed in these prioritized situations.
Table 1. Relevant questions for
assessing the parapet efficiency (number of respondents = 130).
|
Indicator questions |
Answers |
|
1 |
Why are lions falling into open
well? |
Chasing after prey (90%) |
Do not know the answer (10%) |
2 |
What is the land use where a
majority of the wells are situated? |
Agricultural farm land (98%) |
Inside forest (2%) |
3 |
After building a wall, were
there any incidences of lions or other wild animals falling into wells? |
No (95%) |
Do not know the answer (5%) |
4 |
Do you think more parapet walls
would help to protect the lions? |
Yes (95%) |
Answer was not given (5%) |
Table 2. Number of protected
wells surrounding Gir PA (2007–2017) (Data source: Gir West Division Office, Junagadh).
|
|
Range name |
Taluka name |
No. of protected wells |
GIR (West) |
1 |
Jsadhar |
Una |
1418 |
2 |
Dalkhaniya |
Dhari |
1700 |
|
3 |
Tulsishyam |
Una |
1469 |
|
4 |
Savarkundla |
Savarkundla |
1758 |
|
5 |
Pania |
Dhari |
205 |
|
6 |
Sarasiya |
Dhari |
466 |
|
GIR (East) |
7 |
Sasan |
Talala |
5413 |
8 |
Dedkdi |
Mendarda |
5760 |
|
9 |
Babariya |
Una |
3579 |
|
10 |
Jamvala |
Kodinar |
6439 |
|
11 |
Visavadar |
Visavadar |
4649 |
|
12 |
Devaliya |
Maliya-hatina |
3846 |
|
13 |
Talala |
Talala |
6854 |
|
14 |
Ankolvadi |
Talala |
5307 |
|
Total |
48863 |
For
figures & images - - click here
REFERENCES
Banerjee, K. & Y.V. Jhala (2012). Demographic parameters of endangered Asiatic lions (Panthera leo persica)
in Gir Forests, India. Journal of Mammalogy, Oxford academic, Volume 93, Issue 6, 17
December 2012, Pages 1420–1430. https://doi.org/10.1644/11-MAMM-A-231.1
Basu, P., Jhala,
Y. V., & Qureshi, Q. (2012). Assessment of the future of potential dispersal
corridors of Asiatic Lions (Panthera leo persica) across the agropastoral landscape between Gir
& Girnar Wildlife Sanctuary. India Geospatial
Forum. 14t Annual International Conference and Exhibition on Geospatial
Information Tecnology and Applications. Paper
Reference Number: PN-40 http://indiageospatialforum.org/2012/proceedings/ppt/Parabitafullpaper.pdf
Bharucha, E. (2017). Changing Landscapes: The Cultural
Ecology of India (1 edition).
HarperCollins, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India, 400pp.
Dolrenry, S., J. Stenglein,
L. Hazzah, R.S. Lutz & L. Frank (2014). A metapopulation approach to
African lion (Panthera leo)
conservation. PloS One 9(2): e88081. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0088081
Gujarat Forest Department (2015). 14th Lion Population Estimation
Report– 2015 (p. 14). http://gujenvis.nic.in/PDF/lion%20population%20report%202015.pdf
Jhala, Y.V., S. Mukherjee, N. Shah,
K.S. Chauhan, C.V. Dave, V. Meena & K. Banerjee (2009). Home range and habitat preference of female
lions (Panthera leo persica) in Gir forests, India.
Biodiversity and Conservation. 18. 3383–3394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-009-9648-9
Kumar, S., & M. Pathan (2015). The Majestic
Lions of Gir (First Edition). R.R. Sheth &
Co. Pvt. Ltd., Ahmadabad, 368pp.
Kumar, S. & M. Pathan (2018). Jewels of Gir. R R Sheth & Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
Ahmadabad, 312pp.
Meena, V., D.W. Macdonald &
R.A. Montgomery (2014).Managing success: Asiatic lion conservation, interface problems and
peoples’ perceptions in the Gir Protected Area. Biological Conservation 174: 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.03.025
Ministry of Environment, Forest
and Climate Change Government of India (2017). ESZ Notifications. http://www.moef.nic.in/content/esz-notifications
Pathak, N., & Kothari, A.
(2013). Role of Local
People and Community Conservation in Rajasthan, 285–297. In: Sharma, B., S. Kulshreshtha & A. Rahmani
(eds.). Faunal Heritage of Rajasthan, India. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01345-9_14
Pati, B.P. & S. Vijayan (2002). Cub Mortality in Asiatic Lions (Panthera leo persica)
in Gir Sanctuary and National Park , Gujarat : a
Cause for Population Stabilization ? Indian Forester, 128(10),
1159-1161–1161.
Rodgers, W.A.
& H.S. Panwar (1988). Planning wildlife protected area network in India. Volume I - The
Report: A report prepared for the Department of Environment, Forest &
Wildlife, Government of India at Wildlife Institute of India. Wildlife
Institute of India, March 1988, 50pp.
Singh, S. (2000). Gir
Lion- Present scenario and Future Conservation Stratagy.
http://www.catsg.org/fileadmin/filesharing/3.Conservation_Center/3.4._Strategies___Action_Plans/Asiatic_lion/Singh_2000_Gir_lion_status_and_conservation.pdf
Singh, S. (2017). Dispersion of the Asiatic Lion Panthera leo persica and its Survival in Human-Dominated Landscape
Outside the Gir Forest, Gujarat, India. Current
Science 112(05): 933–940. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v112/i05/933-940
Shankar, U. (2017). Protection of wildlife outside
protected areas: With reference to desert districts of Rajasthan.
http://www.teriuniversity.ac.in/mct/pdf/assignment/uday_shankar.pdf