The first comprehensive legislation relating to the protection on wildlife was passed in 1972 and with it, the ground was set for promoting the concepts of ‘bio-diversity’ and ‘conservation’. As India’s wildlife dwindled, several amendments were introduced in the Wildlife Protection Act to make it a strong instrument for protecting species. Over the years, wildlife laws have become more stringent not just in their formulation but also their enforcement.

As a consequence to this what has been threatened, is the livelihood of certain people – the Kalandars or the Madaris – the traditional artists who use performing animals to earn a livelihood. The kalandars were using the animals long before the laws were made. With the changes in the law some moved onto other occupations, others could not adjust to the change and continued in the same profession.

In the year 1999, a three month intensive research was undertaken by Development Alternatives to get a clearer understanding of the wildlife legislation which had affected the livelihood of the kalandars as well as the problems that the madaris were facing due to the restrictions on their profession. The underlying premise of this was to explore the kind of livelihood options that could be developed for these people to reduce their dependency on the animal. The focus of Development Alternatives is not on any kind of livelihood but on ‘Sustainable Livelihoods’ which has been defined as the ability of an individual/family to meet their basic needs in a manner which is dignified and environmentally sustainable.

Article 39 of the Wildlife Protection Act states "all wild animals which have been protected if kept or bred in captivity shall be the property of the government" and "no person shall without the permission acquire any such government property".

In yet another piece of legislation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Act of 1960 (PCAA)-Section 22 declares that "no person shall exhibit or train an animal unless he is registered with the prescribed authority" and that "where it is proved that the training or exhibition causes unnecessary panic or suffering, it shall be prohibited by Court".

It is on the basis of such laws that raids are conducted against kalandars and their animals confiscated . In Delhi, the Forest Department has the power to organize such seizures when they receive the information about a wild animal in captivity.

Historically speaking, the business of using animals for entertainment is an old one and existed long before the tourist guide books popularized India as ‘the land of snake charmers.’ The artists were promoted by the kings and nobility who ruled ancient and medieval India. They were employed in the royal courts as entertainers.

In the beginning, these communities were nomadic in nature and the process of settling down was very gradual. In fact, there are still a few communities of street performers in Rajasthan who have settled down only recently.

It was after the independence of the country, as many of these tribes started settling down in the cities, that they were patronised by the tourism industry. Performances for foreign tourists became common and many were invited to represent India in festivals abroad. This was really the golden age for madaris as suddenly from street wanderers their profession had acquired a touch of glamour.

The trouble soon arose due to the fact that the wildlife in India was simultaneously under severe threat. As the conservation lobby evolved so did the raids against these people increase. The issue which really brought things to the fore was the seizure of Munna bear by the then Minister for Environment & Forests – Mrs Maneka Gandhi, in 1991.

This was the time that the issue came into ‘limelight’ and became polarized between two extreme views. One was that of the conservationists who argued that many of the species that were in the possession of these madaris, were becoming extinct in the wild. The other was the human right’s lobby which argued that these people meant no harm and that they should be allowed to continue with their traditional livelihoods.

The incident of Munna bear, although it did popularise the issue, did not resolve it in anyway. Today, eight years later, the kalandars still keep animals and snakes; the raids against them have intensified and yet they continue in their profession simply because they don’t have the skills to do anything else. Of course, some have managed to move onto other professions while there are others (and a significant number) who have not been able to adapt to the change and they continue to keep snakes, bears ad monkeys even though the law has restricted the use of all of them. In the meantime, the kalandars have organised themselves into a pressure group and frequently organise rallies to draw attention to the problem.   q