ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

A+| A| A-

To Kill a Tigress

The killing of Avni, a conflict tigress in Yavatmal, Maharashtra, who was thought to have killed several people, led to a huge controversy. The issue raises questions on the drivers of human–wildlife conflict, the destiny of tigers in a human-inhabited and -modified landscape, and whether tiger reintroductions can happen in such a scenario.

Even as several activists and citizens attempted to avert the killing of a tigress who had been declared a man-eater in Yavatmal, Maharashtra, the tigress was shot in a night-time operation that flouted operating procedures set by the government. The tigress had been named Avni. The naming in itself indicates an anthropomorphisation, a humanisation of a hitherto unknown wild animal. The campaign for saving Avni was centred strongly around frames valorised by human societiesthat of motherhood, maternal instincts which guide the search for food, and the privacy of a mother (India Today 2018; Kaushik 2018). In some of the online campaigns and street protests for Avni, the fact that the tigress had two cubs who needed stewardship, rearing and mothers care was emphasised and appeared to partly overshadow any transgressions such as man-eating. The protests for Avni, as well as her subsequent shooting, herald a clash between activism centred around animal rights and field realities, and raises questions on how the interface between man and wildlife needs to be managed. The episode needs to be unpacked through its various layersthe urban/rural divide on values, the question of animal rights and wildlife conservation, upholding law and procedure, and the burning issue of humanwildlife conflict.

The first layer that emerges is the divide between urban and peri-urban or rural experiences. Similar to the case of Ustad, a tiger that allegedly killed several people in Ranthambore, the activism around keeping Avni was sustained, far from the forest. Environmental consciousness or ecological citizenship is becoming increasingly cosmopolitan (Lorimer 2010). There is an increasing number of people who feel they do not need to be local residents to raise an issue, but the question is problematised if local people face serious conflict or casualty. Protests for wildlife can then lead to deepening divides amongst the people.

Dear Reader,

To continue reading, become a subscriber.

Explore our attractive subscription offers.

Click here

Or

To gain instant access to this article (download).


Pay
INR 59

(Readers in India)


Pay
$ 6

(Readers outside India)

Published On : 7th Dec, 2018

Support Us

Your Support will ensure EPW’s financial viability and sustainability.

The EPW produces independent and public-spirited scholarship and analyses of contemporary affairs every week. EPW is one of the few publications that keep alive the spirit of intellectual inquiry in the Indian media.

Often described as a publication with a “social conscience,” EPW has never shied away from taking strong editorial positions. Our publication is free from political pressure, or commercial interests. Our editorial independence is our pride.

We rely on your support to continue the endeavour of highlighting the challenges faced by the disadvantaged, writings from the margins, and scholarship on the most pertinent issues that concern contemporary Indian society.

Every contribution is valuable for our future.