Game preservation in India (Rangoon, December 1901) LORD CURZON (1859–1925)

Game preservation in India (Rangoon, December 1901)
LORD CURZON (1859–1925)

e Burma Game Preserve Association had approached Lord Curzon,

while he was on his official visit to Burma in 1901, and drawn his attention

to the decimation of wild life. Curzon replied to their address through this

speech. But the Viceroy’s commitment to wild life preservation was not just

confined to this talk. He followed it up by having the subject examined by

the Government of India and two years later, a draft bill about the

importance of wild life preservation was circulated to various local

governments. e Rangoon address can be seen as the beginning of the

long, and still incomplete, process of the preservation of wild life in India.

e question of Game Preservation in India is one that may appeal, in my

judgment, not merely to the sportsman, but also to the naturalist and the

friend of animal life. It is certainly not through the spectacles of the

sportsman only that I would regard it, though I yield to no one in my

recognition of the manly attractions of shikar. Such considerations,

however, might be suspected of a selfish tinge, and I think that in

approaching the matter we should, so far as possible, put our own

predilections in the background, and view it in the public interest at large.

ere are some persons who doubt or dispute the progressive diminution of

wild life in India. I think that they are wrong. e facts seem to me to point

entirely in the opposite direction.

Up to the time of the Mutiny, lions were shot in Central India. ey are

now confined to an ever-narrowing patch of forest in Kathiawar. I was on

the verge of contributing to their still further reduction a year ago myself;

b f l I f d k d bl d

but fortunately I found out my mistake in time, and was able to adopt a

restraint which I hope that others will follow. Except in native states, the

Terai, and forest reserves, tigers are undoubtedly diminishing. is is

perhaps not an unmixed evil. e rhinoceros is all but exterminated, save in

Assam. Bison are not so numerous or so easy to obtain as they once were.

Elephants have already had to be protected in many parts. Above all, deer,

to which you particularly allude in the case of Burma, are rapidly dwindling.

Every man’s hand appears to be against them, and each year thins the herds.

Finally, many beautiful and innocent varieties of birds are pursued for the

sake of their plumage, which is required to minister to the heedless vanity of

European fashion.

e causes of this diminution in the wild fauna of India are in some cases

natural and inevitable, in others they are capable of being arrested. In the

former class, I would name the steady increase of population, the widening

area of cultivation, and the improvement in means of communication—all

of them the sequel of what is popularly termed progress in civilization.

Among the artificial and preventable causes I would name the great increase

in the number of persons who use firearms, the immense improvement in

the mechanism and range of the weapons themselves, the unchecked

depredations of native hunters and poachers, and in some cases I regret to

say, a lowering of the standard of sport, leading to the shooting of immature

heads, or to the slaughter of females. e result of all these agencies, many

of which are found in operation at the same time, and in the same place,

cannot fail to be a continuous reduction in the wild game of India.

I cannot say that the Government of India have hitherto shown any great

boldness in dealing with the matter. But there has been, and still is, in my

opinion, very good reason for proceeding cautiously. ere are some persons

who say that wild animals are as certainly destined to disappear in India as

wolves, for instance, have done in England, and that it is of no use to try

and put back the hands of the clock. I do not attach much value to this plea,

which seems to me rather pusillanimous, as well as needlessly pessimistic.

ere are others who say that, in a continent so vast as India, or, to narrow

the illustration, in a province with such extensive forest reserves as Burma,

the wild animals may be left to look after themselves. is argument does

not impress me either; for the distant jungles are available only to the

favoured few, and it is the disappearance of game from the plains and from

accessible tracts that it is for the most part in question. I do, however, attach

l h d h ld l l f h ld b d l

great value to the consideration that wild animal life should not be unduly

fostered at the expense of the occupations or the crops of the people. Where

depredations are committed upon crops, or upon flocks and herds, the

cultivator cannot be denied, within reasonable limits, the means of selfprotection.

Similarly, it is very important that any restrictions that are

placed upon the destruction of game should not be worked in a manner that

may be oppressive or harassing to his interests.

Hitherto the attempts made by government to deal with the question by

legislation, or by rules and notifications based on statute, have been

somewhat fitful and lacking in method. In parts, as I have already

mentioned, elephants have been very wisely and properly protected. A close

season has been instituted for certain kinds of game. An Act has been

passed for the preservation of wild birds. And I observe from one of the

enclosures to your memorial that your ingenuity has not shrunk from the

suggestion that a deer may reasonably be considered a wild bird. Under this

Act the possession or sale during the breeding season of the flesh of certain

wild birds in municipal or cantonment areas is forbidden. en again rules

have been issued under the Forest Act protecting certain classes of animals

in certain tracts.

e general effect of these restrictions has been in the right direction. But I

doubt if they have been sufficiently co-ordinated, or if they have gone far

enough; and one of my last acts at Simla, before I had received or read your

memorial, was to invite a re-examination of the subject with the view of

deciding whether we might proceed somewhat farther than we have already

done. We must be very careful not to devise any too stereotyped or

Procrustean form of procedure; since there is probably no matter in which a

greater variety of conditions and necessities prevails; and the rules or

precautions which would be useful in one place might be positively harmful

in another. Among the suggestions which will occur to all of us as deserving

of consideration are some greater restriction, by the charge of fees or

otherwise, upon the issue of gun licences, the more strict enforcement of a

close season for certain animals, the prohibition of the possession or sale of

flesh during the breeding season, penalties upon netting and snaring during

the same period, restrictions of the facilities given to strangers to shoot

unlimited amounts of game, and upon the sale and export of trophies and

skins. I dare say that many other ideas will occur to us in the discussion of

the matter, or may be put forward in the press and elsewhere by those who

l fi d d M d ld b f bl f

are qualified to advise. My own idea would be, if possible, to frame some

kind of legislation of a permissive and elastic nature, the provisions of which

should be applied to the various provinces of India in so far only as they

were adapted to the local conditions. e question of native states

somewhat complicates the matter. But I doubt not that the government

would, where required, meet with the willing cooperation of the chiefs,

many of whom are keen and enthusiastic patrons both of animal life and of

sport. e subject is not one that can be hastily taken up or quickly decided,

but I have probably said enough to show you that I personally am in close

sympathy with your aims, and I need hardly add that, if the Government of

India finds itself able, after further study, to proceed with the matter, an

opportunity will be given to those who are interested in each province to

record their opinions.