Wildlife board nominations draw ire

The reconstituted State Board for Wildlife has drawn objections from conservation organisations over the appointment of nominees whose positions on forest protection and wildlife management have been challenged by environmental activists.

The controversy centres on K. P. Elias, a Wayanad-based campaigner appointed as a farmers’ representative under the government order issued on October 31. Conservationists contend that some of his publicly expressed views are incompatible with the responsibilities of a body advising the government on wildlife protection.

The Wayanad Prakrithi Samrakshana Samithi has questioned the appointment, citing Elias’s positions on controlling wild animal populations and development projects in environmentally sensitive areas. Its president, N. Badusha, alleged that Elias had advocated hunting wildlife to regulate populations and questioned the contribution of forests to tackling global warming.

The organisation has also criticised his reported support for a tunnel road through Wayanad’s hills and an airport project involving the conversion of paddy fields. Those positions, its members argue, warrant scrutiny when selecting people to participate in decisions affecting protected habitats and wildlife.

Elias has defended his approach, saying he intends to use his experience to balance environmental protection with human welfare. He maintains that conventional afforestation alone cannot resolve environmental problems and believes wildlife management must also address the concerns of people living alongside forests.

The disagreement reflects a practical divide over how Keralam should respond to human-wildlife conflict. Farming communities have demanded stronger protection for lives, crops and property, while conservation organisations insist that interventions must remain consistent with ecological evidence and statutory safeguards.

Thomas Ambalavayal, secretary of the Wayanad Prakrithi Samrakshana Samithi, has argued that the government could have selected representatives capable of addressing both conservation requirements and the livelihoods of forest-fringe communities. His criticism focuses on the suitability of the nomination rather than the need to represent farmers.

The Co-existence Collective, bringing together environmental organisations, researchers, scientists and civil society representatives, has also protested against the board’s composition. Its objections add to questions about whether the appointments provide an appropriate balance of ecological expertise, community representation and differing approaches to wildlife management.

Other complaints concern the selection of tribal representatives and the omission of particular political and environmental voices. Critics have questioned whether customary tribal institutions and community leaders were adequately consulted before representatives were nominated. Such objections have not established that the appointments violated any statutory requirement.

The reconstituted board is chaired by Chief Minister V. D. Satheesan, with Forest and Wildlife Minister Shibu Baby John serving as vice-chairperson. Its legislative representatives include Ullas Kovoor from Kunnathur, Sebastian M. J. from Poonjar and C. K. Kasim from Thiruvambady.

Alongside Elias, Father Saji Joseph Vattukulam of Palakkad has been selected to represent farming interests. The inclusion of both representatives gives agricultural concerns a place within the board as the government faces demands for effective responses to wildlife encounters affecting settlements and cultivated land.

The panel also includes established conservation specialists. Renjan Mathew Varghese, state director of WWF-India, and Jose Louise, chief executive of the Wildlife Trust of India, have been nominated alongside M. K. Ranjit Singh, the trust’s chairman emeritus.

Ten members have been selected from conservation, ecology and environmental fields, including Scheduled Tribe representatives. Among those named are researchers and community advocates, with Chandanam N. of Idukki and Raman Rajamannan bringing tribal representation to the statutory body.

The board’s responsibilities make its composition significant. Under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, state wildlife boards advise governments on the selection and management of protected areas, conservation policies and measures intended to reconcile wildlife protection with the needs of local communities.

Its membership also extends across government departments and specialist institutions. Senior officials responsible for forests, tribal development, policing, tourism, animal husbandry and fisheries sit alongside representatives of scientific organisations and wildlife administration.

The official membership includes the State Police Chief, the managing director of the Kerala Tourism Development Corporation and representatives of the Botanical Survey of India and Zoological Survey of India. The Wildlife Institute of India and regional wildlife authorities are represented in the body.

The Chief Wildlife Warden serves as member secretary. Under the October 31 order, nominated members serve for three years from their appointment or until successors are nominated, whichever occurs earlier. Ex-officio members hold their places by virtue of their official positions.