PANAJI
The Goa government has mounted a strong, legal and scientific challenge before the Supreme Court to the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) report recommending declaration of a tiger reserve in the State, arguing that the proposal is based on an erroneous understanding of law, lacks empirical backing, and ignores the State’s right to decide conservation measures best suited to its unique geography and social conditions.
In an affidavit filed by Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (APCCF) Ramesh Kumar, the State cautioned that directing notification of a tiger reserve in Goa would be “superfluous” and could trigger serious unintended consequences, including resentment among local inhabitants due to resettlement pressures and a rise in man–animal conflict.
The State has asserted that the statutory scheme vests discretion with State governments, which are best placed to assess localised challenges such as dense habitation, land scarcity and socio-economic impacts. The CEC, Goa contends, ought to have left decisions on inclusion or exclusion of areas to the State, rather than proceeding on what it termed a pre-determined assumption that a tiger reserve must be declared.
“Report submitted by the CEC ought not to be considered by this Hon’ble Court. Given the lack of any scientific, legal and ecological justification behind its observations and recommendations, the Report suffers from vagueness and demonstrates failure to properly consider and/or appreciate the issues involved,” the affidavit states.
The State further submitted that the report’s observations are riddled with contradictions and “non-application of mind,” particularly on the most fundamental issue — the presence of tigers in Goa’s protected areas.
A central plank of Goa’s argument is that there is no scientific necessity to declare Netravali and Cotigao Wildlife Sanctuaries, or any other protected area in the State, as a tiger reserve. The affidavit points out that no tigers have been recorded in these sanctuaries in the past three cycles of the All India Tiger Estimation (AITE). This position, Goa says, is reinforced by National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) reports, including the 2022 assessment, which noted no tiger presence in areas proposed for notification.
“Any proposal for notifying an area as a Tiger Reserve must be predicated upon the presence of breeding or resident tigers,” the State argued, adding that the CEC failed to undertake any meaningful exercise to ascertain whether tigers in the Cotigao–Mhadei forest complex are permanent residents or merely transient.
Significantly, Goa pointed out that even the CEC acknowledges that tigers from the Kali Tiger Reserve in Karnataka are only transient visitors to Goa’s protected areas and do not use them for breeding. Despite this, the State said, the CEC recommendation appears driven by a broader objective of enhancing ecological resilience of the Kali–Mhadei–Goa landscape to support tiger populations elsewhere, particularly in Karnataka.
“If the purpose of declaring a tiger reserve in Goa is solely to enhance conservation outcomes for tigers in Karnataka, then the existing scientifically managed protected areas in Goa, which already ensure all-round protection for all species including tigers, do not require such notification,” the affidavit submitted.
The State also highlighted geographical constraints, noting that tall mountain ranges of the Western Ghats lie between the Kali Tiger Reserve and Netravali and Cotigao sanctuaries, significantly restricting tiger movement — a fact supported by NTCA findings of no tiger presence in Goa.
Emphasising Goa’s small geographical size and dense habitation, the State objected to the CEC’s demarcation of core and buffer areas without “any cogent scientific empirical evidence” or detailed evaluation of socio-economic impact. Declaring areas as inviolate, it argued, would have far-reaching ramifications given land scarcity and the State’s social fabric.
The affidavit further noted that proposed core areas already have large-scale human habitation, yet there has been no threat to tiger survival in the larger Western Ghats corridor. Goa also stressed that it has already identified ecologically sensitive areas and buffer zones to facilitate safe movement of transient tigers, which is sufficient under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
“The mere presence of a few transient tigers passing through the area does not, by itself, necessitate declaring the area as a tiger reserve,” the State maintained, adding that Goa’s sanctuaries and national park already function as effective wildlife corridors between Karnataka and Maharashtra.
