Gujarat forest dept’s orders clash over Gir re-entry for Maldharis

Ahmedabad: A contradiction in Gujarat’s forest administration has raised concerns among conservationists after two orders by the same department reached opposite conclusions on whether a Maldhari family can return to the protected Gir sanctuary. Almost three years ago, the forest department rejected one Maldhari family’s application because he owned farmland outside the forest, disqualifying him under a rule. This May, it cleared another on the grounds that the forest department itself had never allotted land to him.The department’s order, dated Aug 8, 2023, turned down the request of Govind Dhanta, a Charan resident of Sodhapara, to return to Leelapani ness in Dhari taluka of Amreli district. Dhanta left Gir about 13 years ago because of grass shortages. Ness is the local term for settlements in Gir. It stated that Govind owned approximately 2 hectares of agricultural land in Chanchai village, making him ineligible under Chapter IV of the Gir Protected Area Management Plan. The plan “bars re-entry for anyone who has acquired land, housing or alternative livelihoods outside the forest”.The Maldharis themselves occupy a complex place in Gir: many were voluntarily relocated over the decades to ease pressure on the ecosystem that sustains the Asiatic lion. The order also said the human and livestock population inside the sanctuary had “risen by more than 250% over the past decade, increasing pressure on forest resources and worsening grass shortages...”Citing assessments by the Bombay Natural History Society and lion experts Paul Joslin and Guy Montfort, officials warned that “rising livestock numbers suppress wild herbivore populations, increase disease risks and speed the spread of invasive species such as lantana”.Yet on May 22 this year, a fresh order took the opposite view. It granted Govind’s son, Raja Dhanta, and a second applicant, Harsur Dhanta, permission to return to the Leelapani ness in the Pania range and to build huts for themselves, their descendants and their livestock. Deputy conservator of forests, Gir (east), Vikas Yadav defended the May 22 ruling, maintaining that “the applicants had been able to establish that their forefathers had resided in Gir and that they had not received land from the forest department, making them eligible under existing rules”.Departmental records, he said, showed no land had been allotted to them by the Gir (East) forest division, and a range forest officer’s entries indicated continued residence in a ness. The birth of Raja’s daughter, Sonal, was cited as further evidence of continuous residency. Conservationists are unconvinced. They warn the May order could set a precedent, encouraging other Maldharis settled outside Gir to seek re-entry into the protected area.Critics were swift to point out the inconsistencies. The 2023 order identified the family as residents of Leelapani ness for the 13 years, yet the second application sought permission for Karkadi ness citing a 16-year stay — a location with no ancestral connection to the family. “The father says he stays in Leelapani while the son wants Karkadi ness,” a senior forest official noted. “If they were residents of Leelapani, how could the son seek permission for Karkadi ness, which was not inhabited by their ancestors?”The official argued that effectively reversing a standing departmental order through a fresh application from the same family ought to have been escalated within the department, with review by the chief conservator or principal chief conservator of forests. “It was not appropriate for an officer to overturn the earlier order involving the same family through a fresh application filed by the son,” he said. Under the management plan, residency rights inside the sanctuary require proof of traditional habitation in a specific ness, primary dependence on animal husbandry, and the absence of any property holdings in revenue areas outside the forest.