Even as August 18 will mark four months since the 'disappearance' of Maharashtra's most iconic tiger Jai, worry looms large on wildlife lovers as news spread of two poachers being detained from Paoni in Bhandara district, which is part of Jai's territory spread.
While forest officials quickly clarified that the two offenders were not related to any tiger poaching offences, several wildlife lovers claimed that they are hoping that their beloved Jai is alive. However, their main worry stems from the fact that in spite of so many claims being made by the forest department of Jai's spotting, not even one proof could be made public. Another issue was that there was no major activity of cattle kill being reported for a long time in all the areas where the forest department claims to have found indirect evidence of him.
A senior forest department official said the duo — Madhukar Hatwar and Kisan Samarth of Kodurli — had been picked up on suspicion and charged under relevant sections of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. House searches revealed wires and snares used for catching small mammals and birds.
"Though this could not be directly related to Jai or poaching of any tiger, we will be examining this possibility and carry out detailed interrogation and inquiry," he said, adding that they would also probe if there was any poaching through electrocution and use of live wires.
Incidentally, Jai's last location, based on his radio collar signals, was on April 18 at Paoni range, which is close to his habitat of Umred Karhandla, said forest officials.
The forest department will seek data from the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MahaVitaran) regarding tripping of electricity to help determine if any animals were electrocuted, leading to the tripping of power supply.
Forest minister Sudhir Mungantiwar told dna that reports that the two were involved in poaching of Jai were false. "Jai's tracks have been seen at four-five places," he said, adding that they were looking at collecting photographic evidence.
"They are not related to any tiger offence," said GK Vashisht, spokesperson of the wildlife wing and divisional forest officer, adding that it was difficult to guess Jai's location.
Rubbishing the comments of the forest department as well as a section of conservationists who have been blaming wildlife lovers for creating a fuss over "one tiger", wildlife activist Roheet Karoo said, "Jai was the most dominant male in UKWS and was radio-collared by the forest department to study its movement. If the department cannot keep track of its most dominant tiger, who was part of a study, what can be said about the fate of other tigers?"
He added that the department was only weaving one story after another and that made it all even more suspicious as all the so-called evidence put forth by officials was unreliable.
