declamation on india needs to ban wildlife tourism.
(no unnecessary answers,they will be reported.)
Answers
Answer:
Explanation:
tourists can pose with this tiger at Phuket Zoo, in Thailand. ... questions about how animals are treated and getting answers that didn't always add up, ... In December 2017, after a National Geographic investigative report on harmful wildlife tourism in ... In China, which has no national laws on captive-animal welfare, .
Answer:
Wildlife Tourism in India has always been a controversial matter. In 2010, a Public Interest Litigation was filed by tiger activist Ajay Dubey, claiming that the industry was becoming unsustainable and exploitative. As per the 2006 Amendment of the Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972, “critical Tiger and wildlife habitats” must be inviolate for the vital growth of tiger populations. Any form of human activity was deemed a threat to Tiger conservation. It was on this basis that, on the 24th of July 2012, the Supreme Court ordered a temporary ban on tourism in the core zone of Tiger reserves. The ban stirred significant debate amongst conservationists.
The underlying principle of the order was questionable. Tiger populations grew remarkably in reserves such as Kahna, Bandhavgarh and Ranthambore, despite substantial amounts of wildlife tourism. Contrastingly, Tiger populations in less popular Protected Areas, such as Buxa and Palamu Tiger Reserve, have depleted immensely despite a lack of tourism. Associating wildlife tourism with the depletion of Tiger populations remains a baseless claim.
The Supreme Court hoped that the ban would instigate the establishment of buffer zones to Protect Areas for wildlife tourism, by the November 2011 NTCA guidelines. However, despite the Supreme Court mandate, numerous states were reluctant to comply with the guidelines. Tourism in buffer zones was not the most practical alternative. These regions are used extensively by bordering villages for cattle grazing and the collection of forest produce. Habitat degradation would lead to inferior wildlife sightings, hence attenuating the attractiveness of wildlife safaris.
Although only 10% of India’s 500 Protected Areas are Tiger Reserves, they account for 32% of wildlife tourism. Spotting charismatic species such as Tigers, Elephants, Rhinos and Lions remains the sole interest of most visitors. Much of India’s natural beauty is unheard of by the general public. This is in sharp contrast with countries such as Australia, the US, South Africa and Europe. Unlike India, ecotourism is not limited to safaris solely. These countries offer a wide array of sustainable activities across their natural landscapes including bird watching, camping, adventure sports, and natural history museums. Although it is essential to not damage the natural ecosystem, the ecotourism industry in India could be further developed. Developing more activities in the lesser-known parks could help distribute tourism more evenly across the country. There is much scope to expand. India could also adopt a private-public partnership in a few regions, much like the Private Game Reserves of South Africa!
PLEASE MARK ME AS THE BRAINIEST IF THIS HELPED YOU...