Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Poor protection steps in KNP: CAG

By Staff Reporter
  • Whatsapp
  • Telegram
  • Linkedin
  • Print
  • koo
  • Whatsapp
  • Telegram
  • Linkedin
  • Print
  • koo
  • Whatsapp
  • Telegram
  • Linkedin
  • Print
  • koo

GUWAHATI, March 31 � The poor conservation, protection and development measures in the Kaziranga National Park have been exposed once again in the �Performance audit of the Kaziranga National Park - issues and challenges� of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, which states that from 2010-11 to 2012-13 the KNP authorities received only 19 per cent of the fund they had sought.

The audit report presented today by CH Kharsing, Accountant General (Audit) Assam, also revealed the failure of the authorities to review the management plan timely.

�Against the financial outlay of Rs 93.76 crore proposed in the original Annual Plan of Operations (APO) for 2010-11 to 2012-13, the KNP authorities got only Rs 17.37 crore, which was about 19 per cent of the total fund demanded,� said the report.

The fund allocated by the State government towards wildlife sector and KNP vis-a-vis the total plan outlay of the State, ranged between a meagre 0.03 and 0.07 per cent and 0.005 and 0.02 per cent respectively during the years 2008-09 and 2012-13.

The report has also mentioned that out of 100 freshly recruited forest guards and forester-I deployed in the KNP, 73 were withdrawn within one year. As a result, aged staff were deployed on frontline duties. Surprisingly, reasons for transferring out the fresh recruits despite increase in poaching cases/arrest of poachers, were not on records.

Acknowledging the serious threats to wildlife in the Kaziranga, the report said that none of the wildlife guards of the KNP were imparted any training from 2008-09 to 2012-13. Besides, these guards did not have firing practice as the fresher training module contains only theoretical training on arms and ammunition.

The report further added that there was neither any anti-poaching camp on the periphery of the park nor a foolproof periphery protection plan. This resulted in increased poaching instances mainly near the park�s boundaries.

Next Story
Similar Posts
Poor protection steps in KNP: CAG

GUWAHATI, March 31 � The poor conservation, protection and development measures in the Kaziranga National Park have been exposed once again in the �Performance audit of the Kaziranga National Park - issues and challenges� of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India, which states that from 2010-11 to 2012-13 the KNP authorities received only 19 per cent of the fund they had sought.

The audit report presented today by CH Kharsing, Accountant General (Audit) Assam, also revealed the failure of the authorities to review the management plan timely.

�Against the financial outlay of Rs 93.76 crore proposed in the original Annual Plan of Operations (APO) for 2010-11 to 2012-13, the KNP authorities got only Rs 17.37 crore, which was about 19 per cent of the total fund demanded,� said the report.

The fund allocated by the State government towards wildlife sector and KNP vis-a-vis the total plan outlay of the State, ranged between a meagre 0.03 and 0.07 per cent and 0.005 and 0.02 per cent respectively during the years 2008-09 and 2012-13.

The report has also mentioned that out of 100 freshly recruited forest guards and forester-I deployed in the KNP, 73 were withdrawn within one year. As a result, aged staff were deployed on frontline duties. Surprisingly, reasons for transferring out the fresh recruits despite increase in poaching cases/arrest of poachers, were not on records.

Acknowledging the serious threats to wildlife in the Kaziranga, the report said that none of the wildlife guards of the KNP were imparted any training from 2008-09 to 2012-13. Besides, these guards did not have firing practice as the fresher training module contains only theoretical training on arms and ammunition.

The report further added that there was neither any anti-poaching camp on the periphery of the park nor a foolproof periphery protection plan. This resulted in increased poaching instances mainly near the park�s boundaries.