Study on Translocation of African Cheetahs to India

The study by the Centre for Wildlife Studies (CWS), published in Frontiers in Conservation Science, critically examines the ethical, ecological, and scientific aspects of India's Project Cheetah, which aims to reintroduce cheetahs into the wild. The study raises serious concerns about the project's sustainability and long-term viability.

Key Findings of the Study

1.   High Mortality Rate

o    The study notes that the mortality rate of translocated cheetahs in India is 40%-50%, whereas the expected survival rate was 85%.

o    This indicates that the reintroduction efforts are failing to ensure the safety and well-being of the animals.

2.   Stress and Welfare Issues

o    The cheetahs have undergone over 90 chemical immobilizations and require frequent veterinary interventions, leading to extreme stress.

o    The project appears to compromise the physical and mental health of the cheetahs, raising ethical concerns about their treatment.

3.   Ecological Unsustainability

o    The total global population of African cheetahs is around 6,500 mature individuals, meaning that the species itself is already under conservation pressure.

o    India's plan to import 12 cheetahs annually to establish a viable population depends on a continuous supply from Africa, making it ecologically unsustainable.

o    Captive management of all translocated cheetahs in India indicates the failure of the project’s primary goal—to establish a free-ranging population.

4.   Lack of Participatory Conservation

o    The study argues that conservation decisions should be inclusive and participatory, taking into account diverse perspectives, including local communities that share space with wildlife.

o    The authors warn that the project risks alienating stakeholders and failing to integrate local knowledge systems, human-wildlife interactions, and consent in decision-making.

Ethical and Conservation Implications

1.   Violation of Conservation Ethics

o    The forced relocation and captivity of the cheetahs raise animal welfare concerns.

o    Subjecting animals to prolonged stress, frequent medical interventions, and unnatural conditions contradicts ethical wildlife conservation practices.

2.   Scientific and Ecological Validity

o    The study questions whether India’s ecosystem is suitable for African cheetahs.

o    If cheetahs require continuous external reinforcements, the ecological sustainability of the project is highly doubtful.

3.   Alternative Conservation Approaches

o    Instead of translocating African cheetahs, efforts should focus on preserving and restoring existing Indian ecosystems.

o    The study suggests that conservation policies should prioritize shared spaces between humans and wildlife, rather than enforcing artificial species introductions.

Conclusion

The study strongly argues that Project Cheetah is neither ecologically sustainable nor ethically justifiable due to its high mortality rate, excessive human intervention, and reliance on continuous imports from Africa. Instead, conservation efforts should focus on long-term ecological sustainability, participatory conservation, and ethical wildlife management. Without addressing these issues, the project risks becoming an expensive and ineffective conservation experiment rather than a meaningful step toward biodiversity restoration.

MCQs for Practice

1. Consider the following statements regarding Project Cheetah in India:

1.   Project Cheetah aims to reintroduce Asiatic cheetahs to their natural habitat in India.

2.   The cheetahs under this project were translocated from Namibia and South Africa.

3.   The translocated cheetahs have faced high mortality rates due to stress and ecological challenges.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3

2. The study on the translocation of African cheetahs to India, published in Frontiers in Conservation Science, raises which of the following concerns?

1.   The project relies on a continuous supply of cheetahs from Africa, making it unsustainable.

2.   The introduced cheetahs have faced extreme stress and frequent medical interventions.

3.   The project has been entirely successful in establishing a self-sustaining population.

Select the correct answer using the code given below:
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3

3. With reference to wildlife conservation, which of the following best defines the term "ecological sustainability"?

(a) Ensuring that a species survives in a controlled environment with human intervention.
(b) Conserving biodiversity in a manner that maintains ecological balance without continuous external support.
(c) Relying on ex-situ conservation methods such as zoos and breeding centers.
(d) Introducing non-native species to a new habitat for experimental conservation.

4. Which of the following statements about African cheetahs is correct?

(a) African cheetahs and Asiatic cheetahs belong to the same subspecies and can interbreed freely.
(b) African cheetahs are found in large numbers across India and Africa.
(c) The global population of mature African cheetahs is estimated to be around 6,500 individuals.
(d) African cheetahs were never native to India and were introduced for the first time under Project Cheetah.

5. Which of the following principles is MOST relevant in assessing the ethical implications of translocating African cheetahs to India?

(a) Precautionary Principle – To avoid potential harm by evaluating risks before intervention.
(b) Tragedy of the Commons – Overuse of a shared resource leading to depletion.
(c) Carrying Capacity – Maximum population of a species an ecosystem can sustain.
(d) Keystone Species Concept – A species that has a disproportionately large impact on its ecosystem.

Answer Key:

1.   (b) 2 and 3 only

2.   (a) 1 and 2 only

3.   (b) Conserving biodiversity in a manner that maintains ecological balance without continuous external support.

4.   (c) The global population of mature African cheetahs is estimated to be around 6,500 individuals.

5.   (a) Precautionary Principle – To avoid potential harm by evaluating risks before intervention.