Definition & Legal Basis
A Wildlife Sanctuary (WLS) is an area, other than an area comprised within any reserve forest or the territorial waters, which is declared by the State Government by notification under Section 18(1) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (WLPA). The State Government must be satisfied that the area is of "adequate ecological, faunal, floral, geomorphological, natural or zoological significance, for the purpose of protecting, propagating or developing wildlife or its environment."
The initial notification of intent effectively brings the area under regulatory control. A key aspect is the inquiry and settlement of rights of people in or over the land within the proposed sanctuary.
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
The WLPA provides the foundational legal framework for the establishment, management, and protection of Wildlife Sanctuaries across India, ensuring a unified approach to conservation.
Process of Declaration
The declaration of a Wildlife Sanctuary involves a meticulous legal and administrative process, ensuring rights are settled and conservation objectives are met.
1. Notification of Intent (Sec 18(1))
State Govt. issues initial notification specifying area limits, bringing it under initial control.
2. Appt. of Collector (Sec 18B)
State Govt. appoints a Collector to determine rights within the proposed sanctuary.
3. Proclamation by Collector (Sec 21)
Collector publishes proclamation for claims within two months.
4. Inquiry by Collector (Sec 22)
Collector inquires into all claims and existing (unclaimed) rights.
5. Settlement of Rights (Sec 19-25, 24)
Collector admits/rejects claims, acquires land/rights, excludes land, or allows continuance of rights in consultation with CWLW.
6. Final Notification (Sec 26A)
After rights settlement and claims disposal, State Govt. issues final notification declaring the WLS.
Alteration of Boundaries (Sec 26A(3))
Requires recommendation of the National Board for Wild Life (NBWL) and approval of the State Legislature. This was strengthened by the 2022 amendment, making it similar to National Parks in this regard. Aspirants should verify the latest WLPA.
Historical Background & Timeline
Pre-Independence Era
"Sanctuaries" or "game reserves" existed under princely states and colonial rule, primarily for regulating hunting. Examples: Vedanthangal Bird Sanctuary (formally 1936, older local protection).
Post-Independence, Pre-WLPA (1947-1972)
States used existing forest laws or new acts to declare sanctuaries. Lack of uniformity. Indian Board for Wild Life (IBWL) advocated for a stronger PA network.
Enactment of WLPA, 1972
Provided a unified legal framework, leading to a significant increase in the number and area of Sanctuaries nationwide.
Post-WLPA Expansion & Evolution
Sanctuaries established for specific species (Indian Bustard WLS), unique habitats (Point Calimere WLS). Management focus broadened to ecosystem conservation. Forest Rights Act, 2006 also impacted WLS.
Protection & Permitted Activities
Wildlife Sanctuaries offer significant protection, but with a more flexible regime than National Parks, aiming to balance conservation with compatible human activities.
Control of Entry & Residence (Sec 27 & 28)
Restricted. Requires permit from CWLW/authorized officer, except for public servants on duty, rights-holders, those on public highways, and their dependents.
Permits for: Investigation, photography, research, tourism, lawful business.
Prohibited Activities (Sec 29, 30, 31, 32)
- Hunting (except under special circumstances with permission).
- Destroying/exploiting/removing wildlife or damaging habitat (except with permit for sanctuary improvement).
- Causing fire or leaving fire burning.
- Entering with weapons without permission.
Regulated Human Activities
May be permitted by the CWLW if it was a traditional right and not detrimental to wildlife (Sec 33(d)). A significant difference from National Parks where it's generally prohibited.
Local communities, especially Scheduled Tribes, may be allowed to collect MFP for bona fide livelihood needs, subject to sustainable practices.
Ecotourism is often permitted under strict guidelines. Scientific research is allowed with due permission. Habitat management operations (e.g., weed removal, waterhole creation) are carried out by the Forest Department.
If settled and allowed during the declaration process, certain pre-existing rights compatible with conservation can continue. This is a key difference from National Parks.
Key Distinction from National Parks
The potential for allowing certain pre-existing rights to continue and for a wider range of human activities (under regulation) is a primary differentiator, provided they align with wildlife conservation objectives.
Objectives of Wildlife Sanctuaries
Species-Specific Conservation
Protect viable populations of specific wild animal or plant species, particularly rare, threatened, endangered, or endemic ones.
Habitat Protection & Management
Conserve, maintain, and restore habitats essential for target species and associated biodiversity.
Facilitating Wildlife Movement
Serve as corridors or links between larger Protected Areas, enabling animal movement and gene flow.
Sustainable Human-Wildlife Coexistence
Accommodate compatible traditional human activities and resource uses, fostering local support.
Promoting Research & Monitoring
Provide sites for scientific study of wildlife, habitats, and human impacts.
Supporting Education & Awareness
Raise public understanding and appreciation for wildlife and conservation.
Facilitating Regulated Ecotourism
Provide nature-based recreational opportunities that are ecologically sound and benefit local communities.
Management of Wildlife Sanctuaries
State Forest Department: Primarily responsible, under the Chief Wildlife Warden (CWLW).
Sanctuary In-charge: (e.g., Range Forest Officer, ACF) Manages day-to-day operations.
Similar to National Parks, WLS are expected to have Management Plans outlining conservation strategies, habitat improvement, protection protocols, tourism management, and community engagement. Rigor and implementation can vary.
From State and Central Governments (e.g., Centrally Sponsored Scheme - Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats). Resources may be more limited compared to high-profile National Parks or Tiger Reserves.
Key Management Activities
- Habitat improvement (weed removal, waterhole creation, grassland management).
- Anti-poaching patrols and intelligence gathering.
- Boundary demarcation and protection.
- Fire prevention and control.
- Monitoring of wildlife populations and habitat conditions.
- Regulation of permitted human activities.
- Human-wildlife conflict mitigation.
- Community engagement and awareness programs.
Advisory Committee (Section 33B)
The State Government may constitute an Advisory Committee for each sanctuary to advise the CWLW on better conservation and management. This committee can include local representatives, NGOs, and experts.
Examples & Case Studies
National Chambal Sanctuary
Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh
Focus: Critically endangered Gharial, Red-crowned Roof Turtle, Gangetic River Dolphin.
Case Insight: Riverine Ecosystem & Tri-State Coordination
Conserving a linear, riverine sanctuary across three states presents challenges in coordinated management, controlling upstream pollution, and regulating sand mining/fishing. Success depends on inter-state cooperation and addressing transboundary threats. Community involvement in gharial nest protection is crucial.
Indian Wild Ass Sanctuary
Little Rann of Kutch, Gujarat
Focus: Endemic Indian Wild Ass (Khur). Unique saline desert, seasonal wetlands.
Case Insight: Large Mammal in Unique Desert Ecosystem
Successful population increase. Challenges include managing interface with salt production, ensuring local livelihoods (Agariya salt farmers), and impacts of infrastructure. Highlights need for landscape-level planning.
Dandeli Wildlife Sanctuary
Karnataka (Part of Kali Tiger Reserve)
Focus: Tigers, leopards, elephants, gaur, hornbills. Moist deciduous & semi-evergreen forests along Kali River.
Case Insight: Balancing Conservation, Tourism & Development
Popular ecotourism destination (whitewater rafting). Management must regulate tourism to minimize disturbance while benefiting locals. Faces pressures from development projects in the ecologically sensitive Kali river basin.
Significance in India's Conservation
Network Breadth
Largest component of India's PA network by number, protecting diverse species and habitats.
Flexibility & Coexistence
Allows for a more flexible approach to management and human use, crucial in areas with high human dependence on resources.
Corridors & Buffer Zones
Many serve as vital corridors connecting larger PAs or act as buffer zones, facilitating wildlife movement.
Species-Specific Focus
Enable targeted conservation for species not always the flagship of a National Park.
Conservation of Unique Habitats
Can protect smaller, unique habitats or areas important for specific ecological functions (e.g., bird breeding sites).
Challenges Faced
Despite their importance, WLS face numerous challenges, often exacerbated by higher human interface compared to National Parks.
Habitat Degradation & Fragmentation
Often more pronounced due to permitted activities, encroachment, and higher human pressures.
Poaching & Illegal Extraction
Threats to wildlife and forest produce persist due to accessibility and resource value.
Human-Wildlife Conflict
Higher interface with human settlements often leads to increased conflict incidents.
Invasive Alien Species
Threaten native flora and fauna, altering habitat structure and food webs.
Overgrazing by Livestock
Where permitted, can lead to habitat degradation and competition with wild herbivores.
Funding & Resource Constraints
Often face greater shortages compared to high-profile National Parks or Tiger Reserves.
Enforcement Challenges
Larger areas with more human interface can make effective enforcement difficult.
Boundary Disputes & Rights Settlement
Can be contentious, prolonged, and hinder effective management.
Pressure for De-notification/Diversion
For development projects, especially if perceived as having lower conservation value.