Journal of Indian Bird Records and Conservation - http://www.angelfire.com/fl/indianbirds Dear all Sub: Request to shift the Indian Sarus Crane Grus antigone antigone from schedule IV to schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act. With a humble request I am approaching you to consider the Indian Sarus Crane Grus antigone antigone as threatened species and shift the species from the schedule IV to schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act (1972, amanded in 1991) by making necessary amendments in the law and take some special measures for its conservation. We are making this request based on our own studies on the Sarus Crane in Gujarat State and other studies conducted in the country. Our request for the change of the status of the species from schedule IV to schedule I is based on following arguments. Thoughdistributed in a few northwestern states of India, Gujarat State has a strong hold of the Sarus. The Gujarat State forest department estimated 19659 Sarus Cranes in Gujarat in 1984 (Vaishnav 1985), which was considered to be an over estimate (Parasharya et al. 1989). Gole (1989) estimated < 13000 Sarus Cranes in its entire distribution range in India. Our studies in Gujarat (Parasharya et al. 1989) revealed that the population of the Sarus Crane was mainly concentrated in Kheda, Anand and Ahmedabad districts and its population size was 1508 in Kheda and Anand districts. This estimate of population size was much less than the one made by the state forest department for these two districts (2741 in 1984). We got much serious indications of population decline in 1996 (Parasharya et al. 1996), when we found 15 % decline in the density of Sarus Crane over 7 years period. This rapid decline in its density was correlated with the increasing conflicts with the farmers as the cranes feed and breed in the paddy fields and several other threats. Ecology of the Sarus Crane in the agricultural landscape of Kheda and Anand districts is being studied and two important dissertations by Borad (1998) and Mukherjee (1999) have thrown light on the threats to the species. Though the economic loss to the farmers due to the occupancy of paddy fields by Sarus Crane is negligible, the conflict with farmers is increasing, resulting in serious breeding failure (Borad et al. 1999, in press). Based on the methodology developed for the crane�s population estimation, population size of the Sarus Crane in Kheda and Anand district was 993 (minimum head count) in 1999. Our recent studies of status and distribution in Gujarat state revealed that there are < 2000 cranes in the state. Recentlyin 1998, Shri Rakesh Vyas has estimated 332 Sarus Cranes in Rajasthan. Though Rajasthan is also considered as a strong hold of the Sarus, the estimated number is very low and alarming. Ongoing studies by Dr. B. C. Choudhary and his team (Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun) has revealed that in other states like UP, MP and Maharashtra also the status of the Sarus is very gloomy. Recent census done by Dr. Choudhary estimates < 2000 Sarus in the entire country. The results are alarming. ShriPrakash Gole�s studies in 1988-1989 had shown a sharp shrinkage in the distribution range of Sarus Crane compared to its past records. His population estimate of < 13000 Sarus for the entire country was not taken seriously by the conservationists and the environmental managers. Inour paper presented at Asian Crane Congress at Rajkot (1989), status and threats to the Sarus Crane in Gujarat were reviewed. In1996, during an International seminar on conservation of Wetland and Grassland Birds, organized by BNHS, we could provoke the conservationists to think seriously about the Sarus conservation in the country (Parasharya et al. 1996). As a result, an informal meeting was held on two consecutive days during the seminar under the leadership of Dr. George Archibald � Director, International Crane Foundation (USA) and Shri Prakash Gole. Dr. A. R. Rahmani, Dr. B. C. Choudhari, Dr. V. S. Vijayan, Dr. Lalitha Vijayan, Shri Lavkumar Khacher, Shri Rakesh Vyas, Dr. Vibhu Prakash, myself and a few others, attended the meeting. A decision was taken to strengthen research and conservation efforts. Consequently,Meine and Archibald (1996), in an IUCN publication considered the Sarus Crane as a threatened species and suggested to shift the species from Appendix II to Appendix I of the CITES. Craneresearcher of India met in November 1996 at Coimbatore during PASOC and again at Bharatpur during February 1997 to decide research and conservation priorities. We continued our research on the Sarus in Gujarat through the university, whereas Dr. Choudhary started a special project at WII. Our results are already discussed above. We are sure, with these arguments; you will be convinced that the Sarus Crane requires immediate and strong conservation measures. The very first step towards its conservation is to provide a total legal protection to the species by shifting it from schedule IV to schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act. We are sure that you will resolve this amendment at the earliest. Besides this, a few special measures are also required for the Sarus Crane conservation, which could be prioritized subsequently. Anticipating your early action in this matter. With hope Aeshita ______________________________________________________________________
