MANAS WILDLIFE SANCTUARY

ASSAM, INDIA
Manas Wildlife Sanctuary on the borders of the Indo-Gangetic and Indo-Malayan biogeographical
realms is the most diverse of India’s wildlife reserves. It lies on a gentle alluvial slope in the foothills of
the Himalayas, where wooded hills give way to grasslands and tropical forest. It is home to a great
variety of wildlife, including many endangered species such as the tiger, the pygmy hog, and the Indian
rhinoceros and elephant.
Threats to the Site: This site was listed in Danger between 1992 and 2011, after invasion by militants of
the Bodo tribe seeking political redress. Its infrastructure suffered great damage from 1988 to 1993 and
political instability between 1990 and 1996 destroyed hundreds of trees and animals, including nearly all
the Park’s rhinoceros and 50% of its tigers. The damage was estimated at more than US$2 million.
Listing by the World Heritage Committee influenced the governments of India and the state of Assam to
draw up, with the Park authorities, a $US2.35 million rehabilitation plan in 1997. Security and relations
with local villagers improved but the threat of destruction remained until 2003 when the insurgents
surrendered and began to cooperate through the newly formed Bodoland Territorial Council. The Park
has since begun to recover and rebuild its infrastructure.

COUNTRY
India - Assam

NAME
Manas Wildlife Sanctuary

NATURAL WORLD HERITAGE SITE

1985: Inscribed on the World Heritage List under Natural Criteria vii, ix and x.

1992-2011: Listed as a World Heritage site in Danger because of damage and losses caused by civil
unrest.

IUCN MANAGEMENT CATEGORY

IV Habitat & Species Management Area

BIOGEOGRAPHICAL PROVINCE
Burma Monsoon Forest (4.09.01)

GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION
The Park lies on the border with Bhutan, 41 km north of Barpeta Road township and 175 km northwest
of Guwahati, the regional capital. It spans the Manas River and is bounded on the north by the Royal
Manas Wildlife Sanctuary in Bhutan, on the south by the populous region of North Kamrup and on both
east and west by forest reserves: 26° 30' to 27° 00'N by 90° 50' to 92° 00'E.

DATES AND HISTORY OF ESTABLISHMENT

1907: Part of the area which was previously preserved as royal hunting grounds was classified as
North Kamrup Forest Reserve; more land was added in 1927;

1928: Manas (previously North Kamrup) declared a Sanctuary for rhinoceros (36,000 ha);
1955: Reserve enlarged to 39,100 ha;

1971: The government set up an 890 ha seed farm in the Sanctuary to counter local encroachment
pressures;

1973: Manas Reserve established as the core of the 283,712 ha Manas Tiger Reserve: Project Tiger
set up to preserve the Indian tiger population;

1988: The contiguous Royal Manas National Park in Bhutan established;

1989: Declared a core zone of the newly formed national Manas Biosphere Reserve (283,700 ha);

1990: The Sanctuary was upgraded to a National Park and enlarged to 52,000 ha by the inclusion of
the former Panbari, Koklabari and Kahitama Forest Reserves (Oliver, 1993);

1992+: Listed as endangered because of habitat destruction and heavy wildlife loss caused by Bodo
insurgent groups protesting in-migration from other states and loss of their access to forest
resources;

2001: The Park declared the core zone of the Buxa-Manas Elephant Reserve (283,700 ha);

2003: The Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) recognised, allowing the Bodo people some autonomy.
The Park included within the Chirang Ripu Elephant Reserve.

2011: Site removed from Endangered status.

LAND TENURE
State, in the districts of Barpeta and Kokrajhar. Administered by the Assam State Forest Department.

AREA
50,000 ha It is contiguous with Royal Manas Wildlife Sanctuary in Bhutan (102,300 ha).

ALTITUDE
Ranges from 61m to 110m (WPSI, 2002).

PHYSICAL FEATURES
The Park, which is of great physical beauty, lies on a wide low-lying alluvial terrace below the foothills of
the outer Himalaya. The Manas River flows through the west of the Park, where it splits into two
separate rivers, the Beki and Bholkaduba, to join the River Brahmaputra some 64 km further south.
These and five small rivers running through the Reserve carry enormous amounts of silt and rock from
the foothills as a result of heavy rainfall, steep gradients and friable bedrock upstream. Over the
limestone and sandstone bedrock, boulders and gravels of the Bhabar savanna area to the north, flood
waters have formed shifting channels and swamps and a soil of porous alluvial river terraces of coarse
detritus under layers of sandy loam and humus where the water table is very low. The Terai grasslands
in the south consist of deep deposits of fine alluvium with underlying pans where the water table lies
very near the surface, making it potentially useful farmland. The Manas basin in the west of the Park is
frequently flooded during the monsoon but never for very long due to the sloping relief. Drowning of
wildlife is negligible as animals are able to take refuge on islands of high ground (Deb Roy, 1991).

CLIMATE
The climate is warm and humid with up to 76% relative humidity. It rains from mid-March to October with
most rain falling during the monsoon months from mid-May to September, flooding the western half of
the Reserve. The mean annual rainfall is 3,330mm. November to February is relatively dry when the
smaller rivers dry up and large rivers dwindle (Deb Roy,1991). The mean maximum summer
temperature is 37°C and the mean minimum winter temperature is 5°C (WPSI, 2002).

VEGETATION
Manas lies on the border between the Indo-Gangetic and Indo-Malayan biogeographical realms which
gives it great natural diversity. There are three main types of vegetation: sub-Himalayan alluvial semi-
evergreen forest, east Himalayan mixed moist and dry deciduous forests, the commoner type, and
grasslands. Much of the riverine dry deciduous forest is an early successional stage, being constantly
renewed by floods. Away from water courses it is replaced by moist deciduous forest, which is
succeeded by semi-evergreen climax forest in the northern part of the Park. Its common trees include
Aphanamixis polystachya, Anthocephalus chinensis, Syzygium cumini, S. formosum, S. oblatum,
Bauhinia purpurea, Mallotus philippensis, Cinnamomum tamala, Actinodaphne obvata; Tropical moist
and dry deciduous forests are characterised by Bombax ceiba, Sterculia villosa, Dillenia indica, D.
pentagyna, Careya arborea, Lagerstroemia parviflora, [Link], Terminalia bellirica, T. chebula,
Trewia polycarpa, Gmelina arborea, Oroxylum indicum and Bridelia spp. Much of the most valuable
timber has been harvested.

Two types of alluvial grasslands cover almost 45% of the Park: low alluvial savanna woodland and
semi-evergreen alluvial grassland. These are created and maintained by burning, and on a smaller
scale, by elephants. The riparian grasslands are the best tiger habitat in India, and also well suited to
the unique wild buffalo herds, gaur and barasingha, elephants and waterbirds. There are 43 different
grass species, Imperata cylindrica, Saccharum naranga, Phragmites karka and Arundo donax
predominating (Menon, 1995). There is also a variety of tree and shrub species such as Dillenia
pentagyna which dominates the swamp forest, silk cotton Bombax ceiba a dominant of the savanna
woodland, and Phyllanthus emblica, and shrub species of Clerodendrum, Leea, Grewia, Premna,
Mussaenda, Sonchus, Osbekia and Blumera. There is a wide variety of aquatic flora along river banks
and in the numerous pools (Jain & Sastry,1983). Some 374 species of dicotyledons, including 89 trees,
139 species of monocotyledons including 43 species of grass, and 15 species of orchid have been
identified (Project Tiger,2001). Invasion by Mikena cordata vines and Eupatorium odorata is a problem.

FAUNA
The Park contains the country’s highest numbers of endangered and endemic species: 22 of India's
Schedule I mammals and at least 33 of its animals listed as nationally threatened (* below), by far the
greatest number of any protected area in the country. 55 mammals, 50 reptiles and three amphibians
have been recorded, several species being endemic (Project Tiger, 2001). Many are typical of south-
east Asian rain forest and have their westernmost distribution here, while other species are at the
easternmost point of their range. It had the country’s largest concentration of elephants, the second
largest population of tigers and the third largest population of rhinoceros before the tribal incursions
when the populations of all the protected species which had been gradually increasing, fell back (Deb
Roy,1992).

The most notable threatened species were the indicator species the *tiger Panthera tigris (EN),
numbering 70 in 2000, down from 123 in 1984, *Indian elephant Elephas maximus (EN): 658 animals in
2005 in the greater Chirang Ripu Elephant Reserve, of which Manas Wildlife Sanctuary is the main
elephant habitat, compared to 567 animals in 2002 for Manas Wildlife Sanctuary alone (UNESCO,
2006) and *Indian rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis (VU), 80 in 1990, 39 in 1997 (Project Tiger, 2001)
and perhaps 6 in 2006 (UNESCO,2006). Other mammals include Indian giant squirrel Ratufa indica,
*particolored flying squirrel Hylopetes alboniger, *Indian pangolin Manis crassicaudata, *hispid hare
Caprolagus hispidus (EN), *golden leaf monkey Trachypithecus geei (EN), rare, recently discovered
and endemic to Manas and to adjoining Bhutan which numbered only 305 in 1980, *capped langur T.
pileatus (VU), *western hoolock gibbon Hoolock hoolock (EN), Asiatic wild dog Cuon alpinus (EN),
*sloth bear Melursus ursinus (VU), Himalayan black bear Ursus thibetanus (VU), *greater slow loris
Nycticebus coucang (VU), *binturong (bearcat) Arctictis binturong (VU), *clouded leopard Neofelis
nebulosa (VU), *leopard P. pardus, *Asiatic golden cat Pardofelis temminckii, *marbled cat P.
marmorata (VU), *fishing cat Prionailurus viverrinus (EN) *leopard cat P. bengalensis,), *South Asian
river dolphin Platanista gangetica (EN), *pygmy hog Porcula salvanius (CR), rediscovered in 1964 in
Manas, *swamp deer or barasingha Rucervus duvaucelii (VU), with approximately 450 individuals
(Roy,1992), sambar or spotted deer Rusa unicolor (VU), hog deer Axis porcinus (EN), chital or Indian
spotted deer A. axis, northern barking deer Muntiacus vaginalis, *gaur or Indian bison Bos gaurus (VU)
and Indian water buffalo Bubalus arnee (EN), probably the only pure strain of this species in India.

The Park lies within one of the world’s Endemic Bird Areas (Stattersfield et al.,1998). Including
migrants, over 450 species of birds have been recorded and about 350 breed in the area, 16 being
endemic (Deb Roy,1991) including the threatened *Bengal florican Houbaropsis bengalensis (CR), a
type of bustard, *great hornbill Buceros bicornis and *wreathed hornbill Aceros undulatus among other
hornbill species. The *Bengal floricans of the National Park were estimated at 80 birds with 24 male
territories in the Park in 1988, a fifth of the world population (Narayan et al.,1989). Pied harrier Circus
melanoleucos nested in 1988-9, the first confirmed record for India (Narayan et al.,1989). Recent
records of threatened species include white-rumped and slender-billed vultures Gyps bengalensis (CR)
and Gyps tenuirostris (CR), greater spotted eagle Aquila clanga (VU), lesser kestrel Falco naumanni
(VU), rufous-necked hornbill Aceros nipalensis (VU), white-throated bushchat Saxicola insignis (VU),
marsh, Jerdon’s and slender-billed babblers Pellorneum palustre (VU), Chrysomma altirostre (VU), and
Turdoides longirostris (VU), blackbreasted parrotbill Paradoxornis flavirostris (VU), grey-crowned prinia
Prinia cinereocapilla (VU), bristled grassbird Chaetornis striatus (VU), and yellow weaver Ploceus
megarhynchus (VU). Uncommon waterfowl species include *spotbilled pelican Pelecanus
philippinensis, *greater adjutant stork Leptoptilos dubius (EN), *lesser adjutant stork L. javanicus (VU),
Baer’s pochard Aythya baeri (EN) and swamp francolin Francolinus gularis (VU) (Scott, 1989; BirdLife
International, 2004).

50 reptile species include the *gharial Gavialis gangeticus (CR), possibly introduced from Bhutan in the
Kosi River or from a captive breeding program, eleven species of snake including vine snake Ahaetulla
nasutas, banded flying snake Chrysopelea pelias Assam trinket snake Elaphe frenata, king cobra
Ophiophagus hannah (VU), *Indian rock python Python molurus, and banded krait Bungarus fasciatus;
also *yellow and *common monitor lizards Varanus flavescens and V. salvator, and two rare turtles:
*Assam roofed turtle Pangshura sylhetensis (EN), lost until 1988, and Indian black turtle Melanochelys
trijuga (Rahmani et al.,1989).

CULTURAL HERITAGE
Manas takes its name from the Goddess Manasa. The forests of the Reserve were traditionally
inhabited and their resources used mainly by Bodo and Adhivasi tribesmen, though the area was also
preserved as royal hunting grounds for two royal families. There are no archaeological remains (Project
Tiger, 2001).

LOCAL HUMAN POPULATION

Some 57 villages with 28,800 inhabitants live on the fringe of the National Park, predominantly Bodo
tribal people (Project Tiger, 2001). They come under the control of he District Revenue Authorities.
Surrounding forests, originally tribal lands used for grazing and tree products, come under the Assam
Forest Department and have been logged by the timber and paper industries for a pittance, after which,
immigrant farmers illegally purchased the cleared land. This denial of access so alienated the tribal
people that they preferred to see the jungle razed than let outsiders take it. Their growing numbers
forced villagers into using the protected forests which caused continued conflict with the National Park.
Driven by feelings of deprivation and neglect, insurgent groups became the greatest threat to the Park
and a destructive insurgency raged from 1988 to 2003. That year the Bodo laid down their arms, the
Bodoland Territorial Council, was formed and was accorded a measure of autonomy. The locals began
to rebuild the Park as their own and even to fund it when the State did not (Debonnet & Lethier, 2008).

VISITORS AND VISITOR FACILITIES

Some 5,000 local sightseers used to visit the Sanctuary during the winter holidays. They disturbed the
wildlife and may have to be accommodated nearer the edge of the Park (Deb Roy,1991). In 1984
32,860 visited the site, but owing to the Bodo agitation in Assam, the Park was closed between 1989
and 1995. In 1996 there were some 2,770 visitors (Project Tiger, 2001). Danger from the insurgents
then became so great that the Park was again closed. By 2001, foreign visitors still needed a permit to
enter the Park and did so at their own risk, despite which, in 2002 3,219 visitors visited, although no
foreigners (UNESCO, 2003). In 2003 when tourism began to revive there were 90 foreign visitors. A
forest bungalow at Mothanguri, in the north of the Park, has dormitory accommodation for 48 persons. A
number of rest houses and camp sites were also available. The Tourist Department of Assam
conducted deep safari tours, especially in the Mothanguri-Bansbari area, including elephant rides and
boat trips down the river. The high potential for eco-tourism is being realised and local people and
groups are becoming involved in this, building unauthorised roads and structures.

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND FACILITIES

The vegetation has been surveyed by the Botanical Survey of India (Jain & Hajra, 1975). Tiger and
elephant censuses are regularly undertaken by Project Tiger. The status of the Bengal florican was
investigated in May 1984 (Ali et al., 1985). In 1993, WWF initiated a project to identify the essential
needs of the fringe villagers to provide alternatives to their dependence on the Park (WWF, 1993).
There is regular monitoring of the loss by area of timber, resources and species, conducted by the
University of Guwahati, the Assam Remote Sensing Applications Centre, the Wildlife Institute of Dehra
Dun and NGOs. Since 2003 two rough surveys of the major wildlife populations were made (Mathur et
al.,2007) and in 2010 several NGOs (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment,
Aaranyak, WWF-INDIA and others) had begun re-surveying the fauna (UNESCO,2010)
CONSERVATION VALUE
Lying at the confluence of the Indo-Gangetic and Indo-Malayan biogeographical realms Manas has
great natural diversity as well as spectacular scenery. Its varied habitats support 22 scheduled species,
and it is the richest in species of all Indian wildlife areas. It is the core of an extensive tiger reserve that
protects an important migratory corridor for elephants and other wildlife along the West Bengal -
Arunachal Pradesh - Bhutan borders. Its wetlands are of international importance. It is also the single
most important site for the survival of golden langur, pygmy hog and hispid hotspot and is one of the
world’s Endemic Bird Areas.

CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT
The Assam Forest Department is responsible for the administration of the National Park under the
Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. Its management was a low priority until the 1960s, but its inaccessibility
protected it except for marginal encroachments and livestock grazing by villagers which were eliminated
during that decade, at the cost of the lasting resentment of the local people. The Park is essentially a
wilderness, forming the core of the Tiger Reserve which is classified as reserve forest. The last legal
forestry in the core area occurred in 1964. Hunting officially ceased when the area was established as a
Sanctuary, but before the Bodo invasion, traditional hunting did not have noticeable effects on the
wildlife. Much roadstone was extracted from the area during the construction of the National Highway in
1963-1964 but no further exploitation of any kind is now allowed. Plantations were created along the
southern border as a buffer against agricultural encroachment but this stopped in 1977. The restrictions
do not apply to the surrounding buffer zone of the Tiger Reserve, which is managed on a multiple-use
basis. There, residents are allowed to selectively remove timber, collect firewood, cultivate land, graze
their domestic livestock and benefit from inoculation of their cattle to prevent transmittal of diseases to
the wildlife (Deb Roy,1992).

More intensive management was begun in the 1960s. Careful controlled burning in autumn is the most
important management tool to maintain the different habitats, especially the grassland. It is both a
traditional practice and done to prevent devastation by intense wildfires (Deb Roy,1991). Management
has always been oriented towards the larger mammals, especially the tiger. The Project Tiger scheme
has provided staff accommodation, marked boundaries, developed roads and a wireless network to
improve anti-poaching operations. A rhinoceros action plan was prepared under the Biodiversity
Alliance co-ordinated by the M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation and WWF-India (WWF,1996).
Following successful captive breeding of gharial, there were also plans to restock channels in the area.
A management plan to include social welfare measures such as the provision of water, medical and
veterinary care and farming advice was drawn up (WWF/IUCN, 1990). A three year rehabilitation
program was prepared by the Ministry for Environment and Forests, the State Forest Department of
Assam and the Manas Directorate which aimed to restore the infrastructure, and set up habitat
improvement programs and eco-development schemes for surrounding villages (Project Tiger, 2001;
UNESCO,1997). However, from 1988 to 2003 the Park was occupied by Bodo separatist groups
protesting major in-migration from other states which made them a minority in their own homeland and
campaigning for restoration of their right to use forest lands and for tribal autonomy. This resulted in
widespread destruction, the withdrawal of staff and a major loss of larger animals. However, the conflict
had little physical impact on the conservation value of the site except at its southwestern end (Deb
Roy,1992).

By 2002 however, staff were slowly reoccupying guard posts and re-establishing control. By mid 2002, a
management plan was finalised (in need of revision by 2008) which set out an agenda for management-
oriented research, a community outreach strategy, conservation and awareness programs, tourist
activities and improvements in infrastructure (IUCN, 2002). Relations with local villagers improved.
Volunteer groups from the local NGOs Green Manas and Manas Bandhu slowly began to persuade
local militants to help conserve not destroy the Park (PA Update, 2001). Camps and guard posts were
rebuilt, allowing better management. The government included the reserve in Project Elephant and was
facilitating committees on participatory planning and economic development projects (UNESCO,2002).
Relations with Bhutan were very good despite the scale of poaching and insurgency. A WHC/IUCN
mission visiting the site in early 2002 promoted the nomination of Bhutan’s Royal Manas Wildlife
Sanctuary as a future transboundary World Heritage site which would improve protection over the whole
Manas ecosystem. This was revived by the 2008 WHC/IUCN Mission with renewed interest from
Bhutan, Assam’s Chief Wildlife warden, the Indian and Bhutan offices of WWF and the UNESCO office
in New Delhi, and the Indian government itself Debonnet & Lethier, 2008).
In 2003, when their insurgent bases in Bhutan just across the border became usable, the Bodo
insurgents agreed a pact with the government, handed in their arms and were granted a degree of
autonomy in the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC). Thereafter, considering the Park their own territory,
they were persuaded to protect it against intruders and to convince neighboring villagers to take the
same attitude. The Park was understaffed and underfunded, with inadequate equipment and
infrastructure no comprehensive conservation and interpretive strategy towards local communities. But
as a result of the tribes’ cooperation, poaching declined, tourism gradually restarted and it began to be
possible to rebuild the Park's infrastructure (UNESCO, 2006). By 2005, it was possible to initiate
ecotourism and the local people were becoming involved in rebuilding the Park’s infrastructure
(UNESCO,2005). In 2006 the State Government released funding. New Park roads, bridges, buildings
and a wireless system were built and five field stations had been manned and armed. It also initiated the
Indian Rhino Vision (IRV) 2020 in collaboration with the International Rhino Foundation, WWF-India, the
US Fish & Wildlife Service and others. This aims at a major population and range expansion program
for rhinos in Assam, relocating the animals especially to Manas. Reintroduction started in 2006 with one
female from Kaziranga National Park (UNESCO, 2006). That year, local Bodo communities and the
Territorial Council endorsed IRV 2020 and committed their full support. Funds were released to WWF-
India to improve the infrastructure in Manas for this purpose. By 2008 three international foundations,
four national and six local NGOs were providing support to the property. The 2008 WHC/IUCN mission
was very impressed by the devotion of the local people to the rehabilitation of the Park and their belief in
the alternative livelihoods it could provide, in particular its potential for tourism. By 2008 31 Park camps
had been rebuilt and 7 more for the rhino reintroduction program were due for completion, 130 km of
trails and 100 km of trails plus bridges had also been reopened. Former poachers were even
collaborating with the revival. It remained urgently necessary to conduct a baseline survey on the
recovery of wildlife populations and set up a full monitoring system for flagship species. It was also
essential to resolve the problem of releasing funds held back by the state (Debonnet & Lethier, 2008).
By 2008 funds were at last were available for improvement of park management, building staff capacity,
increasing local awareness, involvement and sustainable development (UNESCO,2010)

MANAGEMENT CONSTRAINTS
The Indian National Forest Policy Act of 1952 held the poor responsible for deforestation and stated that
national forests should be used to produce timber for industry and commerce, not for subsistence by the
local people, on the ground that where land is owned rather than held in common, it is usually treated
with care (Lurie 1991). The area was therefore made a Sanctuary without provision of alternative
resources for the local people who continually encroached on it as though it was still open to them. The
Tiger Reserve as a whole remains intact, although the buffer zone has suffered many encroachments,
especially between Sankosh in the far west and the Manas river, which have led to haphazard
fragmentation of the forest. About 1,500 ha in the Panbari Reserve Forests (the western core zone of
the Park) have been illegally settled since 1973. There is no buffer to the south, and village
communities on the edge collect grasses, fuel, wood, fodder, timber and graze their livestock in the
Park. Villagers believe that these uses are theirs by right, which have been denied to them since the
designation of the Tiger Reserve in 1973 (WWF,1993).

Uncontrolled dry season burning and unsustainable levels of hunting, organised poaching and illegal
extraction of timber and firewood and encroachments occur in the buffer zone, and the tigers are
persecuted. Against this must be set the frequent damage to the villagers’ animals, crops and houses
by tigers, elephants, wild boar and deer from the Park. During 1979-83 for example, there were 11
deaths by a man-eating tiger for which no compensation was paid. Crop-raids by elephant and hog-deer
are increasingly common, which leads to continued ill-feeling amongst local people (Deb Roy,1991). In
1984 the government tried to close Kokla Bari Seed Farm, set up in the core Park grasslands in 1971,
but was strongly opposed by plains tribes, such as the Borokacharis, who are employed there
(Choudhury, 1986). In the 1990s two dams were proposed in the upper reaches of the Manas and
Sankosh rivers which might severely impact the integrity of the Manas ecosystem. Serious flooding in
2003 which washed away part of the Park’s riverside land and equipment was attributed to works on the
Manas river dam upstream in Bhutan (WildLife Trust of India, 2004).

Between 1988 and 2003, various factions of the Bodo people, who form about one-third of Assam's
population, intermittently invaded the park. In February 1988 both Reserve and Park were violently
occupied by separatist members of the local All Bodo Students Union (ABSU), campaigning for
autonomy for its people and for restoration of their right to use forest lands (Jackson,1989). They were
later joined by Bodo Liberation Tigers (BLT), the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) and the
National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB). Arson, looting, destruction of bridges and buildings and
the murder of eight wildlife guards by the terrorists occurred, in the absence of the police. The park was
closed to the public between 1989 and 1996. This resulted in the forced evacuation of Sanctuary staff,
leaving the Park open to professional poachers, timber smugglers and fringe villagers. 21 of the 44
ranger posts were destroyed and 30 were abandoned. As a result, hundreds of animals, especially
rhinoceros, but including elephant, tiger and valuable prey species of deer were killed (Hussain,1989;
Rahmani et al.,1989). Consequently, in 1992, the site was placed on the list of World Heritage in
Danger. The Park was closed to the public between 1989 and 1996 and the disturbances lasted
intermittently from 1988 to 2003, recurring in 2001 and 2002 as militants of the ULFA and NDFB fled
from refuges in Bhutan and (PA Update, 2001; UNESCO, 2002).

The insurgents had little impact on the conservation value of the site which was protected by its
inaccessibility, dense cover and poor visibility, except at its southwestern end (Deb Roy,1992).
However, damage totalling over US$2 million to the infrastructure, the murder over ten years of 15
guards and the destruction of guard posts in twelve areas of the Park, prevented the reestablishment of
normal protection and undermined management and staff morale. The infrastructure long remained
poor and landmines were set along the Bhutan border by the insurgents. The Assam Forest Protection
Force was available to keep order, but until a pact in 2003, militants still crossed the area, especially in
the Eastern and Western ranges (Milne,1997; Project Tiger, 2001), and only the central Bansbari Range
section of the Park was considered safe to patrol (IUCN,2002). However, a ten-year Master Plan under
the auspices of the Project Tiger Directorate of the Ministry of the Environment was drawn up (Gupta,
2005).

Poaching, always a problem, was most serious during the 1990s. The surrounding villagers, being very
poor, depend on natural resources for their livelihood which they perceive the Park and Reserve to be
denying them. They were therefore hostile. But the most serious poaching was carried out by large well-
financed well-armed professional gangs, partly backed by traders in endangered species (Narayan,
1990). As a result, hundreds of animals including rhinoceros, elephant, tiger and valuable prey species
of deer were killed (Hussain,1989; Rahmani et al.,1989). There is a rich market for horns so the local
rhinoceros population was nearly extinguished by poachers: numbers dropped from approximately 80 in
1990 (Roy,1991) to only 6 in 2002 (IUCN, 2002). Partly to feed the market in tiger parts the tiger
population fell from 123 in 1984 to 70 in 2000. 20 elephants had been killed by 1997 and deer are still
frequently taken for village feasts (Project Tiger, 2001). Hundreds of trees were felled and
encroachment was continuous, especially in the Panbari Forest, where the habitats of endangered
species such as golden langur, hispid hare and pygmy hog, were put at risk. Illegal grass-cutting for
fodder and grazing also occurred. Despite the high level of crime, protection of the Park by the state and
central governments was delayed by lack of available trained and experienced manpower, and by the
political difficulty of releasing funds granted for this use. To improve relations with villagers, funding
intended for Park use was instead spent on schemes to benefit them, and on infrastructure, leaving the
Park dependent on other sources of funding (UNESCO 2000).

STAFF
Administration of the Tiger Reserve is the responsibility of the field director of Project Tiger, under the
Forest Department. In 1986 there were 4 forest rangers, 2 deputy rangers, 29 foresters, 12 head game
watchers, some 49 forest guards, 46 game watchers and 104 other staff. In 2000, 158 of 469 staff posts
(294 being forest guard posts) were unfilled and the staff’s equipment, experience and budget remained
inadequate (Project Tiger, 2001; IUCN, 2001). UNESCO did provide 3 vehicles and boats.

In 2008, there was a permanent staff of 252 with 70 full time casual staff as well as 50 young volunteers
recruited under the Indian Rhino Vision Program. The BTC funded 90 full-time armed and uniformed
volunteers. 50 guards and 11 rangers from the Forest Protection Force also assisted. However, 123 of
the 445 established positions remained vacant through lack of funding, some of which could be filled by
the most promising volunteers (Debonnet & Lethier, 2008).

BUDGET
In 1989-1990 Rs 2,545,000 (US$195,770) were allocated by the Governments of India and Assam for
biodiversity and rhino conservation, but much was said to have been used for other purposes. In 1995
less than two thirds of the annual budget of US$272,850 had been paid by 1996 and was inadequate. In
1997 the World Heritage Fund granted US$75,000 for vehicles, boats and equipment, and in 1998,
US$90,000 for ranger posts and staff housing (UNESCO, 1988). Because of the insecurity of the site,
this last was used instead on veterinary and health camps and repairs to irrigation systems to improve
relations with villagers (UNESCO,2000). In 1997-1998 the Indian government granted US$500,000 to
strengthen conservation in the Reserve (UNESCO,1999).

In 2005-6 WHF provided US$165,000 for purchase of equipment, rehabilitation of infrastructure and
community activities and US$50,000 was released to WWF-India to improve the infrastructure in Manas
for the IRV program. In late 2005, the State Government via Project Tiger released a first installment of
Rs.8 million (US$202,500) to the National Park out of a budget for the year of Rs.19.8 million approved
for the Park (UNESCO,2006). Since then however, the State has not released the funds for the Park
sanctioned by the central government. By 2008 Rs312,900 (~US$7,900) had been received from the
Project Elephant budget, but Rs9,300,000 (~US$335,000) sanctioned for the Project Tiger budget year
was still to be released. The Park has had to rely on funding from the Bodoland Territorial Council which
provided Rs4,504,500 (US$114,000) from its own budget to rehabilitate the infrastructure such as anti-
poaching camps, bamboo bridges and patrol tracks, to buy vehicles and feed and pay volunteers.
However, by 2008 the Ashoka Trust for Research on Ecology and Environment on behalf of the
UNESCO India Biodiversity Program, was channelling funds from the UN Foundation, Ford Foundation
and Suri Sehgal Foundation. to improve the park’s management, build staff capacity, increase local
awareness and involvement and sustainable development

LOCAL ADDRESS
The Field Director, Project Tiger, PO Barpeta Road, 781 315, Barpeta District, Assam, India.

REFERENCES
The principal source for the above information was the original nomination for World Heritage status.
Ali, S.,Daniel, J. & Rahmani, A. (1985). Study of ecology of certain endangered species of wildlife and
their [Link] floricans. Annual Report 1,1984-1985. Bombay Natural History Society, Pp.79-83.

Anon. (1995). Manas Tiger Project. Manas News 1 (1).

Burnett, J. (1958). The Manas - Assam's unknown wildlife sanctuary. Oryx 4: 322-325.

BirdLife International (2004). Important Bird Areas in Asia: Key Sites for Conservation. BirdLife
International, Cambridge, U.K.

Choudhury, A. (1988). Conservation in Manas Tiger Reserve. Tigerpaper 15 (2):23-27.

Das, J. et al. (2007). Conservation and Monitoring of Tiger Population in Manas Wildlife Sanctuary
Through Field Techniques and Capacity Building of Local Stakeholders, Conservation report Series
2007. Final Project Report. Published by Aaranyak. 33 p.

Deb Roy, S. (1992). Manas - A World Heritage Site. A report to the 4th World Congress on Protected
Areas, Caracas, Venezuela.

---------- (1991). Manas - A monograph. Tigerpaper 18(1).10 pp.

---------- (1990). Manas - A Monograph. A report prepared for the U.N. Food and Agriculture
Organisation. 31 pp.

---------- (1982). Elephant Census, as Carried out in Manas Tiger Reserve, Methodology and Figures.
Unpublished report. 23 pp.

Debonnet, G. & Lethier, H. (2008). Reactive Monitoring Mission to the Manas Wildlife Sanctuary, India.
UNESCO/IUCN Monitoring Report, Paris.

Forest Department & Manas Tiger Project (2001). State of the World Heritage in the Asia-Pacific
Region. India Manas Wildlife Sanctuary. Report to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, Paris

Gavron, J. (1989). Marauders slaughter Assam tigers. The Sunday Telegraph. 10/10/89. p.16.

Giles, R. & Jhala, Y. (2002). Management Concepts for Human Populations at the Edges of Wildlands.
Gupta, A. (2005). Manas: Transboundary Conservation on the Assam-Bhutan Border. In Mittermeier, et
al. 2005).Transboundary Conservation. A New Vision for Protected Areas. CEMEX-Agrupación Sierra
Madre-Conservation International, Mexico. 372pp.

Hussain, Z. (2004). Indian tiger roars again as Sanctuary foes turn friends. Forest Conservation Portal,
August.

Hussain, W. (1989). Bodo militants on shooting spree inside Manas Tiger Reserve. The Telegraph,
Calcutta. 5/4/89.

IUCN (2008). The 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Cambridge, U.K.

---------- (2002). Report on the State of Conservation of Natural and Mixed Sites Inscribed on the World
Heritage List and the List of World Heritage in Danger. (April). Gland, Switzerland.

---------- (1985). World Heritage Nomination. Submitted to the UNESCO World Heritage Bureau.

Jackman, B. (1996). The thin green line. Telegraph Magazine 19/10/96

Jackson, P. (1981). Conservation in Bhutan. Unpublished report. Appendix 8.

---------- (1989). Manas tiger reserve threatened. Environmental Awareness

13 (1).

Jain, S. & Sastry, A. (1983). Botany of Some Tiger Habitats in India. Botanical Survey of India, Howrah.
71 pp.

Jain, S & Hajra, P. (1975). On the botany of Manas Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam. Bulletin of the
Botanical Survey of India 17: 75-86.

Lahkar, [Link] al. (2007). A Study of Habitat Utilization Patterns of Asian Elephant Elephas Maximus, and
Current Status of Human Elephant Conflict in Manas Wildlife Sanctuary within Chirang Ripu Elephant
Reserve, Assam. A report by Aaranyak. 74 p.

Lurie, T. (1991). Saving the forests: India's experiment in cooperation. The Ford Foundation Letter,
22 (1): 2.

Mathur, V. et al. (2007). Rapid Assessment of Wildlife Values in Manas World Heritage Site, Assam,
India. Wildlife Institute of India for Ministry of Environment & Forests, Gov’t of India, New Delhi. 51 p.

Menon V., et al, (in press). Bringing Back Manas, Conserving the Forests and Wildlife of the Bodoland
Territorial Council, Conservation Reference Series 7, Wildlife Trust of India. 247pp.

---------- V. (1995). Continuing concern about Manas Tiger Reserve. Catnews 23.

Milne, R. (1997) Mission Report: South Asia Meeting to Review Status Conservation of World Natural
Heritage and Design and Cooperative Plan of Action. New Delhi, India. Prepared for the World Heritage
Centre, UNESCO. Unpublished Report, 7pp.

Narayan, G., Sankaran, R., Rosalind, L & Rahmani, A. (1989). The Floricans Houbaropsis bengalensis
and Sypheotides indica. Annual Report 1988-89. Bombay Natural History Society. 39pp.

Narayan, G. (1990). Manas: Paradise under siege. Sanctuary Asia 10 (1): 42-50.

Oliver, W. (1980).The Pigmy Hog. The Biology and Conservation of the Pigmy Hog Sus salvanius and
the hispid hare Capriolagus hispidus. Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust Special Scientific Report No.1.
80 pp.

---------- (1993). Situation in Manas Wildlife Sanctuary improving. Oryx 27 (1): 14.

PA Update (2001). 29,30,31. [Link].

Project Tiger (2001). Project Tiger Status Report. Ministry of Environment & Forests. (Unpubl.) 6 pp.

---------- (n.d.). Manas. National Park brochure, Project Tiger, Barpeta Road, Assam.

Rahmani, A., Narayan, G. & Rosalind, L. (1989). Threat to India's Manas Tiger Reserve. Unpublished
report for the Ministry of Environment & Forests. 12 pp.

Rogers, W. & Panwar, H. (1988). Planning a Wildlife Protected Area Network in India. FAO, Dehra Dun.

Scott, D.(ed.) (1989). A Directory of Asian Wetlands. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland/Cambridge, U.K.181 pp.

Stattersfield, A. et al. (1998). Endemic Bird Areas of the World: Priorities for their Conservation. BirdLife
International, Cambridge, U.K.

Talukdar, B. et al. (2007). Update Report on Security Assessment, Indian Rhino Vision 2020, Security
Assessment Group, 5th meeting of the Task Force, WWF/IRF, Department of Environment and Forests,
Assam. 5 p + annexes.

Tiwari, S. et al. (n.d.). Fauna of Manas Tiger Reserve, In Alfred J., Ramakrishnan & Gopal, R. (eds),
Faunal Diversity of Tiger Reserves in India. Volume II. Published by the Zoological Survey India and
Project Tiger, New Delhi. 621-670pp.

UNESCO World Heritage Committee (1997). Report on the 20th Session of the Committee. Paris.
---------- (1998). Report on the 21st Session of the Committee. Paris.
---------- (1999). Report on the 22nd Session of the Committee. Paris.
---------- (2000). Report on the 23rd Session of the Committee. Paris.
---------- (2002). Reports on the 25th & 26th Sessions of the Committee. Paris.
---------- (2003). State of the World Heritage in Asia and the Pacific 2003. Periodic Report for the Asia-
Pacific Region. Paris.
---------- (2005). Report on the 29th Session of the Committee, Paris.
---------- (2005). Report on the 29th Session of the Committee, Paris.
---------- (2006). Report on the 30th Session of the Committee, Paris.
---------- (2010). Report on the 34h Session of the Committee, Paris.

WPSI (Wildlife Protection Society of India) (2002). Manas Tiger Reserve.

WildLife Trust of India (2004). Flash floods wash away parts of Manas Wildlife Sanctuary. WildLife Trust
of India News, July.

WWF/IUCN Project 1002 (n.d.). Operation Tiger - Manas Tiger Reserve, Assam. Gland, Switzerland.

---------- (1990). Project Report – Manas Project: Friendly Buffer Zone Around Manas Tiger Reserve.
Gland, Switzerland.

WWF-India (1993). Eco-development of the Southern Periphery of the Manas Wildlife Sanctuary: A
Socio-economic Survey of Villages in the Project Area. WWF -India Project No.4838. 59 pp.

DATE: 1985. Updated 7-1988, 3-1990, 8-1995, 7-1997, 7-2002, 10-2005, 8-2008, 8-2010,
June 2011.