MEE TR Web Portal

Introduction

Panna TR is situated in the northern part of the Vindhyan Range, straddling south-west to north-east of the Panna, Chhatarpur and Damoh districts of MP. It forms an important connecting link between the eastern and western wildlife populations through the Vindhyan Range. The forest type, teak association with kadhai (Annogeisus pendula), forms a unique ecotone, of northernmost extension of teak and easternmost extension of kadhai species. Panna is the only TR located in the Bundelkhand region. The name Panna is derived from a small and lesser-known but important Rajput kingdom of central India. Incidentally, the area was a shikargarh and hunting ground for the rulers before its merging with the Indian union.

The terrain is typical bench topography with plateaus, gorges, cliffs, overhangs and mesic sites offering a variety of niches and habitats for wildlife to thrive in. Eight species of vulture visit the park, four of which are residents, nesting and breeding here. There are ancient rock paintings dotted around the landscape dating back to 2000 years and of the pre-historic period. The Ken River flows through the reserve from south to north, over a distance of 55 km, and it is the home of the gharial and mugger crocodiles and other aquatic animals.

The plateau areas are characterized by savannah forests with very thin vegetation and continuous grass cover, where dry deciduous scrub forests are seen. The slopes and valleys are filled with dense forests. Bamboo associations are seen only on the slopes. The Anogeissus pendula forest is an edaphic sub-type (on specific rock type, i.e., conglomerate) which occurs mainly in a long strip of a small width (0.5–1.0 km) on the foothills from Pipartola to Gangau dam on the banks of the Ken River. Sterculia urens (kullu) is in abundance, with good regeneration.

Panna TR spreads over an area of 1578 km² with six forest vegetation types, 150 species of bird, 10 species of reptile, 50 species of fish and many species of mammal, of which the tiger is the key species. The Panna tiger reintroduction plan and its monitoring are considered as one of the most successful reintroduction plans in the annals of Indian PA management, and it can be taken as a benchmark study for such proposals in the future. The corridor plan has been well chalked out, with four possible corridors having been identified, extending over a landscape spread over 15,000 km².

Management Strengths:

Panna Tiger Reserve is located at an important part of the tiger bearing landscape and links the eastern and western populations of the wildlife (north-east to south-west) of the Vindhyan Range. With its plateaus, valleys, undulating hills, gorges, cliffs, cave shelters, crevices, etc it provides a varied habitat for the fauna and flora.
PTR represents the northern-most extension of teak forests and the eastern limit of Anogeissus pendula forests. The ecotones of both teak and A. pendula fall in the area.
The unique composition of 60% open woodlands and meadows present in the park provides a vital habitat supporting herbivores, carnivores and grassland birds. Finding a habitat that supports sambar, chital, chinkara, chousingha, barking deer and nilghai all together is rare. The landscape offers one of the best habitats for the vulture species of India, and eight species of vultures visit the park.
The Ken River, flowing from south to north in the park (51 km length), forms the lifeline of the park.
The Integrated Landscape Plan is an excellent document for holistic conservation of the tiger.

Management Weaknesses:

The TCP for the core, buffer and corridor have been nicely prepared. In the absence of its approval, there is no administrative legality for implementation of the plan.
The proposed Ken–Betwa link project, if implemented, will inundate 51 km² of pristine riparian vegetation of PTR, seriously disrupting the water flow regiment and depriving the wildlife of cover and of food resources during the pinch period and jeopardising the existence of specialised wildlife species that live in the area.
The presence of (3) villages in the core, (49) villages in the buffer and (151) villages within a distance of 5 km from the periphery of PTR boundary exerts a huge pressure on the limited biomass resources present in the park.
The existing NH 75 from Panna–Chhatarpur (13 km length) and SH 46 from Panna to Amonganj (35 km length) pose a grave danger to the free movements of wildlife in the park. The high-speed vehicles that pass through the road give no chance to any wildlife, from butterflies to tigers, to cross the road safely without being collided with or crushed.
There are (151) EDCs for which 35 micro plans have been prepared. The rest are under preparation. There is a lack of a clear funding mechanism to sustain the functioning of the EDCs.
The corridor plan identified (4) important corridors that connect PTR with Bandavgarh NP, Sanjay NP, Nauradehi, South and North Panna, etc. So far, no work has started, while the tiger population in the park has increased to 57–60. There is bound to be a conflict between tiger and man.
At the senior level, apart from the park veterinarian, none are trained in wildlife management. Against (67) posts of Forester sanctioned, only 25 are in position, and the remaining posts are vacant. There is an urgent need to fill the vacant posts.
LAC has been constituted in 2018, but so far, no meetings have been held.

Immediate Actionable Points:

Out of the 16 villages in the core area of Panna TR, 13 villages have been relocated, leaving three villages to be relocated. The park authorities have linked the relocation of Dhodhan, Palkoha and Khariyani-Minari villages with the implementation of the Ken–Betwa project. The project when completed will inundate and submerge all the three villages and the R&R (Rehabilitation and Resettlement) activity has to be implemented by the district authorities. Relocation of the three villages is essential and should be expedited as the core (CTH) will then be completely free of all biotic pressure and it will aid in tiger management and other wildlife of the area. Relocation should be taken up without waiting for the construction Ken–Betwa project.
There are two drones in use in PTR, of which one is a thermal imaging drone. The use of drones in PTR will increase in future, and as a futuristic policy, the PTR authorities should train competent in-house field staff members in drone technology and equip all the peripheral ranges with thermal imaging drones. The straying of tigers into the human-dominated landscape is bound to increase, and it will be good to equip the staff in thermal drone technology as it will be of great assistance in tracking straying tigers in the night. Similarly, the staff have to be equipped with night vision devices with necessary training to assist with night time tracking of straying wildlife.
The Integrated Landscape Management plan for Panna TR, approved by NTCA, has been very well prepared and covers all the critical angles of tiger conservation exhaustively. However, this has to be converted into a time-bound action plan and implemented by the state forest department so that tiger conservation in MP can be implemented in a holistic manner.
There are 49 villages within the buffer and 151 villages within 5 km of the periphery of the park. There is heavy biotic pressure as observed from the condition of the vegetation in the buffer zone, and serious efforts have to be made to reduce the dependence of the villagers on the resources of the park. Innovative planning has to be done involving the district administration in formulation of plans leading to a reduction of the fuelwood consumption and grazing pressure on the buffer vegetation.
There are two roads passing through PTR, viz., NH 75 (13 km length) and SH 46 (35 km length). It is heartening to know that there is a proposal to shift NH 75 to the periphery of the park. If this is done, it will be a significant decision of NHAI. Regarding SH 46, since there is no proposal to shift it outside the park, it is better that the responsibility of implementing wildlife mitigation measures for linear projects be imposed on the user agency when widening or maintenance of the road is proposed/approved. In the interest of PTR, all road kill data of wildlife for both NH 75 and SH 46 should be collected and entered in a register with details and photographic evidence for future use in strengthening the case for road shifting and for planning mitigation measures.
The veterinary unit of PTR is well trained and provided with the necessary infrastructure. There is one Daninject tranquilising gun in good working condition. It is better that a second tranquilising gun be procured and kept in reserve. Further, apart from the park veterinary doctor, there is no second trained veterinarian at the park. It is wise to train the local VAS of the AH dept in tranquilisation so that the services can be requisitioned in times of necessity by the park authorities.
PTR is stated to experience four to six drought periods in adecade . Drought proofing is essential, and in the interest of the park, a detailed climate study should be undertaken and remedial measures determined. Similarly, a carbon study must be undertaken to estimate the capture or loss of carbon in the park.
The research in PTR should be enhanced to assist the FD in taking management decisions. It is essential to have a team of researchers to undertake surveys of the flora and fauna within the park and map their spatial distribution/abundance, etc., which will provide the baseline data for future decisions. Local universities should also be engaged in this exercise, and researchers should be encouraged to do research in wildlife subjects, including wildlife health, pertinent to the park.
While all the resources in the park, especially the distribution of water, grasslands and cover, have been listed and mapped, the presence of natural salt licks has been overlooked. Natural salt licks play an important role in wildlife biology, and from the management perspective, it will be wise to list and map them and include the map in a protection plan of patrolling to safeguard the wildlife that uses them regularly.
The draft TCPs for the core, buffer and corridor have been made nicely and are have been submitted for approval. In the corridor plan it is observed that eco-tourism has been proposed as a component of plan implementation. It may be examined whether eco-tourism in the corridor will hinder the smooth dispersal of wildlife, and decisions should be taken accordingly.
It is important to encourage women from EDCs to participate in TR management and to constitute SHGs with funds from the Govt.
During Independence Day and Republic Day functions, meritorious staff may to be awarded merit certificates for wildlife conservation works.
With repeated outbreaks of zoonotic diseases in the wild and transmission of diseases from domestic animals to wildlife, the wildlife health monitoring needs to be strengthened.
Bamboo is an important browse material of the sambar, deer and chousingha, and the rhizome is a food of wild pigs. The past distribution of bamboo is to be compared with the present distribution in the park, and efforts should be made to reintroduce bamboo in the depleted areas. Seed ball sowing of bamboo is said to be successful, and this should be done along with rhizome planting along nallahs.
PTR has a functional dog squad with one dog and is very effective as a deterrent in preventing the commission of wildlife crimes. However, it will be good to add another dog squad to complement the existing one and train the dogs in tracking and uncovering traps and snares laid, as well as in tracking offenders in wildlife crime.
The Pardhi/Baheliya, a hunting tribe, may be educated, and alternative livelihood opportunities may be encouraged with the help of all stakeholders in the larger interest of the protection and conservation of PTR and its animals and birds.
Cremation places may be made at suitable places outside PTR with the help of the district administration to stop cremation by local villagers in the PTR buffer area, which often causes fires.
Invasive weeds like Parthenium, Eupatorium and wild basil in the core and buffer areas need to be systematically removed and indigenous palatable grass species are to be encouraged so that wild herbivores may find sufficient grass to feed on.
The habitats of the threatened species, viz., the wolf, pangolin, rusty spotted cat, caracal, etc are to be identified and the conservation interventions may be carried out accordingly.
The growth of the tiger population and the carrying capacity of the core and buffer must be studied scientifically and assessed so that artificial support of the tiger population is avoided and its spillover into the human-dominated landscape can be eliminated/reduced.
The Special Tiger Protection Force may be created at the earliest.
A security sudit needs to be done on priority.
PTR may prepare a Disaster Risk Management Plan for emergent threats.

Download Section:

File Description	Download

Panna Tiger Reserve

Introduction

Management Strengths:

Management Weaknesses:

Immediate Actionable Points:

Download Section: