Are species vermin in today's age?
This article finds place in Deccan Herald on
7th June 2016.
Thanks are due to Deccan Herald, FIAPO and all the people who have been patient
with my questions and helped increase my understanding on the topic.
So what exactly is the situation when a
species is declared ‘vermin’, I asked a lawyer working on environmental issues.
We were discussing the recent government orders (and notifications) that allow hunting of select species. It is akin
to a rat in your house — in other words, you can kill, eat or sell the species,
I was told. So — for example — I can actually catch a nilgai (in districts of Uttarakhand where it is
declared a vermin), tie it in front of my house, even beat it and it could
not be questioned by law, I asked just to confirm. You are correct, came the
reply.
The Pocket Oxford Dictionary refers to vermin as ‘mammals and birds harmful to game, crops’. The Wildlife Protection Act in India has 2 provisions that allow hunting. A senior lawyer interpreted them for us thus — Section 11 allows for hunting of an individual or a group of animals causing damage, and thus removes a problem. Section 62, on the other hand, allows for a species to be declared a vermin, and thus enables a species to be removed. Section 11 can be put to effect by the state itself, while Section 62 warrants the Central government to accept a request from a state.
While conversations on the subject continued, a senior wildlife conservationist said declaring species as vermin was taken up by the British to remove what were regarded as ‘nuisance’ species. “India was a country of wolves,” he said, “and the consequences of their putting a bounty to do away with the species are felt even today. Even tigers were considered vermin at one point of time.” Can we do something about this, I press on. Why don’t you lobby to have this clause done away with – especially given that Central Government at Delhi is keen to remove archaic laws and provisions, he shot back. A press release during April 2016 pointed out to the government being eager to remove 422 archaic laws from the statute.
The Pocket Oxford Dictionary refers to vermin as ‘mammals and birds harmful to game, crops’. The Wildlife Protection Act in India has 2 provisions that allow hunting. A senior lawyer interpreted them for us thus — Section 11 allows for hunting of an individual or a group of animals causing damage, and thus removes a problem. Section 62, on the other hand, allows for a species to be declared a vermin, and thus enables a species to be removed. Section 11 can be put to effect by the state itself, while Section 62 warrants the Central government to accept a request from a state.
While conversations on the subject continued, a senior wildlife conservationist said declaring species as vermin was taken up by the British to remove what were regarded as ‘nuisance’ species. “India was a country of wolves,” he said, “and the consequences of their putting a bounty to do away with the species are felt even today. Even tigers were considered vermin at one point of time.” Can we do something about this, I press on. Why don’t you lobby to have this clause done away with – especially given that Central Government at Delhi is keen to remove archaic laws and provisions, he shot back. A press release during April 2016 pointed out to the government being eager to remove 422 archaic laws from the statute.
Image Acknowledgement & Details:
.jpg){kind=link}
A retired senior forest department official
while discussing the topic looked up the list of species declared vermin. The
Wildlife Protection Act refers to animals listed in Schedule 5 of the Act as
vermin. The list contains 4 names — common crow, fruit bat, rat and mouse. “Of
these,” he said, “the fruit bat we know as a crucial pollinator today while the
common crow is disappearing in many areas.” Section 62, in other words, allows
select species to be shifted from other schedules (that offer high protection) to Schedule 5; the category with least
protection. Do we then, in 2016, a world different both in terms of threats our
wildlife face and our understanding of ecology, need this provision in our
laws? Another crucial question he put up was why this provision (Section 62) was suddenly being used, in
multiple states, when it has not been put to use since it came to force.
A campaign is in place to get these orders reversed; orders that are random and harbour immense potential to damage ecological cycles. Public Interest Litigations and applications under the Right to Information Act have been filed, articles written, letters written to the minister and meetings organised. Facebook posts brought forth questions like what happens when meat, hide and horns of species declared vermin in one state are sold in another? Do we have mechanisms in place to check wildlife trade arising on account of these orders?
One of the comments was stark and pertinent: How can a species causing maximum damage to the planet have the audacity to declare other species as vermin?
Previous
posts on the topic:
The real vermin is human, right!!!
ReplyDelete