Goa Government Rejects Supreme Court Panel's Tiger Reserve Proposal as 'Vague and Unscientific'
In a significant development, the Goa government has filed a detailed affidavit in the Supreme Court, strongly opposing the recommendation by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) to notify a tiger reserve in the state. The government has labeled the committee's report as "vague" and "unscientific", arguing that it lacks proper ecological, legal, and factual justification.
The Controversial Recommendation
In November 2025, the Supreme Court-constituted Central Empowered Committee recommended that Goa should initiate the process of notifying a tiger reserve within three months. The committee suggested that the reserve should initially be confined to areas contiguous to Karnataka's Kali Tiger Reserve, with minimal human habitation.
However, the Goa government, through additional principal chief conservator of forests and chief wildlife warden K Ramesh Kumar, has vehemently contested this recommendation. The government's affidavit argues that the CEC has "exceeded its authority" by effectively issuing directions rather than making recommendations.
Core Arguments Against the Proposal
The government's opposition rests on several key arguments:
- Absence of Resident Tigers: The affidavit emphasizes that the fundamental requirement for declaring a tiger reserve is the presence of breeding or resident tiger populations. The government contends that the CEC failed to conduct any meaningful exercise to ascertain tiger presence in the Cotigao-Mhadei forest complex.
- Transient vs. Resident Population: The government states that tigers from Karnataka's Kali Tiger Reserve are merely transient visitors to Goa's protected areas and do not reside or breed there. This distinction, they argue, is crucial for determining the need for a tiger reserve.
- Existing Protection Framework: Goa maintains that its current protected areas—including wildlife sanctuaries and national parks—are already scientifically managed and provide comprehensive protection for all species, including tigers.
- Corridor Function: The government highlights that Goa's protected areas serve as excellent corridors for tiger movement between Karnataka and Maharashtra, a fact they claim the CEC overlooked.
Potential Negative Consequences
The affidavit outlines several potential issues that could arise from declaring a tiger reserve:
- Local Resentment: The move could lead to resentment among local inhabitants, particularly regarding potential resettlement requirements.
- Increased Human-Animal Conflict: Notification could potentially increase conflicts between humans and animals in the region.
- Socio-economic Impact: The government argues that the CEC failed to properly evaluate the socio-economic consequences of its recommendations.
Scientific and Legal Concerns
The government's affidavit raises serious questions about the scientific basis of the CEC's recommendations. It points out that the National Tiger Conservation Authority's 2022 report noted "no presence of tigers" in the areas proposed for the tiger reserve.
Furthermore, the government argues that the CEC arbitrarily demarcated core and buffer zones without proper scientific evidence or detailed evaluation of local conditions. They maintain that such decisions should be left to the state government, which has better awareness of localized challenges and habitation patterns.
The Broader Conservation Context
At the heart of this dispute lies a fundamental question about conservation priorities. The Goa government argues that declaring a tiger reserve "solely for the purpose of conservation of tigers in Karnataka" is unnecessary when existing protections are already adequate.
The affidavit concludes that the proposed tiger reserve would be "superfluous" given the absence of resident tiger populations and the existing robust protection framework. The government maintains that the current system adequately safeguards tiger transit while avoiding unnecessary disruption to local communities and ecosystems.
This legal challenge represents a significant moment in India's wildlife conservation discourse, highlighting the complex balance between national conservation goals and state-level implementation realities.
