A status survey of existing Community and Conservation Reserves in south India Arun Kanagavela,b, Rajeev Raghavanb,c, Cynthia Sinclaira and Aditya Prithvid aWildlife Information Liaison Development Society, Kumudham Nagar, Vilankurichi Road, Coimbatore - 641 035, Tamil Nadu, India ! bConservation Research Group (CRG), 96, St. Albert’s College, Banerji Road, Kochi - 682 018, Kerala, India cDurrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NR, United Kingdom ! dDepartment of Econometrics, University of Madras, Tholkapiar Campus, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005, Tamil Nadu, India! *Corresponding author: [email protected] Preferred Citation: Kanagavel, A., R. Raghavan, C. Sinclair & A. Prithvi (in prep). A status survey of existing Community and Conservation Reserves in south India. WILD, Coimbatore. The purpose of the following study was to document the management approaches adopted, interactions between stakeholders, challenges faced and lessons learnt at existing community and conservation reserves in south India. Face to face semi- structured interviews were conducted with local communities, conservation researchers and forest department (FD) officials at the Aghanashini Lion Tail Macaque Conservation Reserve of Karnataka, Kadalundi-Vallkunni Community Reserve of Kerala and Tiruvidaimaradur Conservation Reserve of Tamil Nadu. Given the lack of basic information on the management of these community-based reserves, a semi-structured interview model with open-ended questions that allowed for in- detail discussion with respondents was used. Existing literature on the relevant reserve were summarized after which, the stakeholders interviews were summarised, any difference within and among stakeholders being highlighted. Aghanashini Lion-tailed Macaque Conservation Reserve The Aghanashini Lion-tailed Macaque Conservation Reserve (ACR), located in the Sirsi-Honnavarra forest division of the Uttara Kannnada district, Karnataka supports the largest population of lion-tailed macaque, 650 in 32 groups (Macaca silenus) within its range. In 2008 a plan was submitted to the PCCF and Western Ghats Task Force Committee to declare the area as a Conservation Reserve. Later, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Karnataka resubmitted a new proposal that included new sensitive areas along the Aghanashini River, prioritised through detailed surveys that incorporated the occurrence of endangered and endemic species, critical corridors and threats (Dandekar 2011; Kumara 2011). There could have been an opposition from politicians towards reserve establishment due to confusion over resource utilization rights by local communities (The Times of India 2010). The reserve spanning across 300 sq. km was formally declared in June 2011 and would be managed in collaboration with the forest department and gram panchayaths without restricting resource use (Kumara 2011; The Times of India 2010). A local respondent at Aghanashini Lion-tailed Macaque Conservation Reserve A forest department official, two locals and a team of three from a local NGO were interviewed during this study. The reserve was identified through designating potential sites, based on the forest cover, priority species and ecosystems and a threat index from across the district of Uttara Kannada. It aimed to protect the LTM, Myristica swamps and new amphibian species and the entire landscape from the impending threat of dams. Participatory rural appraisal and community mapping were undertaken to understand the occurrence of priority species and non-timber forest products (NTFP), NTFP usage, changes in the area over time, conflicts, sites the local communities would like to protect and their perceptions towards conservation. The resulting information, ecological and primarily the economic benefits of conserving the priority sites were conveyed to decision makers. Non-governmental organisations (NGO) lobbied for the formation of the reserve through presentations made to several ministers including the forest minister and chief minister and with support from the Director of the Tiger Task Force, the area was declared as a Conservation Reserve on 11th May 2011. While one respondent from the local community was aware of reserve demarcation since the NGO had approached her and discussed the plans of the forest department and their organization’s, another was unaware. A continuous association of over 30 years through empowering the local communities in sustainably harvesting NTFPs and value addition assisted the NGO team in garnering the participation of local communities. The reserve is currently in the process of setting up its management committee, which would consist of representatives from the local community, forest department and NGO. Two such committees would be chosen to manage the lower and upper part of the reserve, as the spatial distance would make it difficult for locals from across the reserve to meet at a common place, which would conduct its meetings close to the communities. If existing and interested, local individuals would be chosen from Village Forest Committee and Joint Forest Management (JFM) Committee. Local respondents stated that they mainly depended on the forests for firewood, which was unaffected after reserve declaration. Their involvement in the reserve was by not hunting and felling trees and informing the officials about offences. The NGO team stated that the priority of local communities might not be conserving tigers but the conservation of NTFPs and their use and factors like education and health. They also stated that the FD was not really interested in the collaborative initiative and with the person in charge of the committee being from the forest department, could be problematic as had occurred in case of the Joint Forest Management program (JFM). They also stated that the enforcement of policy varies between each official and some may not be willing to convert such Reserve Forests to protected areas of higher protection as it would lead to a loss of benefits. Both respondents from the local communities stated that interactions with the forest department were “very little” and that they walked through the settlements once in a while and distributed money to them under the JFM. The FD respondent stated that their responsibility was that of an administrator of the reserve, which was a joint effort between the FD and the local communities and that the department would provide support to local communities in undertaking conservation activities. Kadalundi-Vallikunnu Community Reserve Spread across 1.5 km2, the Kadalundi-Vallikunnu estuary located in Kozhikhode and Malappuram districts of Kerala is the first community reserve of India, declared in 2007 (Chitharanjan 2011). The estuary surrounded by patches of mangroves serves as a wintering ground for several species of migratory birds and supports 110 species of avian fauna including the critically endangered Spoon-billed Sandpiper Eurynorhynchus pygmeus, Lesser Sand Plover Charadrius mongolus, Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica and Crab Plover Dromas ardeola (The Hindu 2007; Aarif et al. 2011). The estuary faced several threats from sand mining, dumping of wastes, coir retting, defoliation, collection of oysters and mussels and infrastructure development (Remani 1989; Nair et al 2007; Aarif et al. 2011) and the reserve was setup not only reduce these threats but also to promote it as a birding destination and improve local livelihoods (Nair 2007; The Times of India 2011). The government reaffirmed that the reserve would not pose a threat to local livelihoods and would promote community participation (The Hindu 2009a). It is managed by a six member Reserve Management Committee, headed by the Kadalundi Panchayath consisting of three individuals from the Vallikunnu Panchayath, two from Kadalundi Panchayath and a Forester from the Thamarassery range of the Kerala Forest Department (The Hindu 2009b). It took two years to formulate this committee due to a power struggle between the Kadalundi and Vallikunnu Panchayaths which was resolved due to the intervention of the Forest Minister of Kerala as per which it was decided that the chair of the committee would be rotated between the two panchayaths (Protected Area Update 2008; The Hindu 2009b). In 2009 funds were released by the central government to formulate reserve management plans through a participatory rural appraisal (PRA) with the local communities and realise the above-mentioned aims (see The Hindu 2009c). However the formulated management plan was not accepted and these initiatives have not yet begun (The Times of India 2011). The estuary flanked by the railway line, magrove and coconut plantations at the Kadalundi- Vallikunnu Community Reserve Two FD officials, four locals (two each from Kadalundi and Vallikunnu municipalities) and two researchers were interviewed in this study. All the stakeholders were aware of the purpose behind the establishment of the reserve, as an attempt to protect the estuarine biodiversity. However the researchers perceived that the reserve was setup also to reduce resource utilization primarily mangroves since the locals wanted to fell them in their land, thereby protecting the avian fauna and associated tourism. Contrastingly the forest department official stated that the reserve was setup to safeguard local livelihoods while attempting to improve the estuary in parallel. The stakeholders stated that bird watchers, “environmental lovers”, panchayath,