Two Reserved Forest Areas in Maharashtra to Be Declared Wildlife Sanctuaries; Approval Granted for 14 Conservation Reserves

The approvals expand Maharashtra’s protected-area network through two sanctuary designations and 14 proposed conservation reserves. They matter because protected areas provide a formal framework for conserving wildlife, habitats and important ecological landscapes across several districts.

Kolamarka Conservation Reserve in Gadchiroli, known for wild buffaloes, was approved for sanctuary status. The newly expanded Tansa area, adjoining the existing Tansa Wildlife Sanctuary, also received approval. The 14 conservation reserves include Velhe-Mulshi, Bhor-Girigad, Dindori, Surgana, Taharabad, Chinchpada, Alibag, Ghera Manikgad, Lonavala, Gumtara, Jawhar, Asherigad, Dhamani and Ekara.

The decisions are approvals by the State Board for Wildlife, chaired by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. The areas cover multiple districts and include forests, wildlife habitats and landscapes needing conservation attention. The article does not provide the total area of the 14 conservation reserves or say when every designation will take effect.

A wildlife sanctuary is a legally protected area created to conserve wild animals and the habitats they depend on. Its central purpose is to reduce threats such as habitat loss, disturbance and damaging development. Protection helps wildlife survive while allowing authorities to manage the area under applicable rules.

In Maharashtra’s case, the Board approved sanctuary status for Kolamarka and the expanded Tansa area. It also approved 588.767 hectares of revenue and private land from six villages for inclusion in Tansa, aiming to make the sanctuary free of human habitation. Sanctuary management plans can also include routine works such as dam repairs, rehabilitation and desilting.

Protection does not mean every activity automatically stops. The Chief Minister directed officials to prepare standard operating procedures within three months, so necessary works can proceed under management plans. Infrastructure proposals in protected areas and related zones were also approved, showing that conservation decisions require regulated planning rather than a simple blanket ban.

The article gives several area figures, but not one combined total for all newly designated or expanded protected areas. The expanded Tansa proposal includes 588.767 hectares of revenue and private land from six villages. That land is being brought into the sanctuary to help make it free of human habitation.

The Board also approved critical wildlife habitat proposals covering 100.139 square kilometres in Koka Wildlife Sanctuary and 255.79 square kilometres in Jayakwadi Bird Wildlife Sanctuary. These are habitat designations within existing sanctuaries, rather than stated sizes for the two sanctuary approvals themselves.

In addition, 14 conservation reserves were approved across seven districts. The article names each reserve but gives no individual or combined area for them. It also does not state the total area of Kolamarka or the newly expanded Tansa sanctuary. Therefore, the available figures show important components, not the full scale of the entire decision.

Kolamarka and Tansa stand out for different conservation reasons. Kolamarka, in Gadchiroli district, is known for its population of wild buffaloes. Giving it sanctuary status can strengthen the formal protection and management of an area supporting this notable wildlife population.

Tansa is significant because the newly expanded sanctuary adjoins the existing Tansa Wildlife Sanctuary. The Board also approved adding 588.767 hectares of revenue and private land from six villages. The stated purpose is to make Tansa Wildlife Sanctuary free of human habitation, creating a larger, more continuous protected area.

These decisions show two approaches to conservation. Kolamarka gains sanctuary recognition because of its wildlife value, while Tansa combines expansion with a plan to remove habitation from the protected area. The article does not provide population figures for the wild buffaloes or the total size of either sanctuary, so their precise scale cannot be assessed from the available information.

The State Board approved adding 588.767 hectares of revenue and private land to the newly expanded Tansa Wildlife Sanctuary. The land comes from six villages: Ogda, Khodde, Tirmal, Pachghar, Phanasad and Amle. The stated conservation objective is to make Tansa Wildlife Sanctuary free of human habitation.

This means the land will become part of the sanctuary’s protected area. However, the article does not explain whether residents have already moved, whether relocation has begun, or what compensation and rehabilitation arrangements apply to them. It therefore does not support a definite claim about the residents’ immediate future.

The meeting separately discussed a policy for rehabilitating villages in tiger-reserve buffer zones when residents are willing to relocate. The Chief Minister ordered further examination of disaster-management responsibilities, compensation mechanisms and Forest Department powers. That discussion may inform future decisions, but the article does not expressly apply it to these six Tansa villages.

A wildlife sanctuary is a protected area formally designated for conserving wildlife and habitat. A conservation reserve is also a conservation designation, but it can be used for landscapes that need protection without being declared sanctuaries. The article lists both types of approval, but it does not explain their legal differences in detail.

Maharashtra approved sanctuary status for Kolamarka and the newly expanded Tansa area. It also approved 14 conservation reserves, including Velhe-Mulshi, Bhor-Girigad, Lonavala, Jawhar and Ekara. This shows how the government is applying different labels across different places and districts.

Using both designations can provide flexibility in planning protection for wildlife, habitats and local landscapes. Sanctuary management plans can incorporate routine works such as dam repairs and desilting, while conservation reserves can add protection to other important areas. The article does not state the exact rules, ownership arrangements or management powers attached to each designation.

Protected-area management must conserve wildlife while allowing essential public works and addressing the needs of nearby communities. Maharashtra’s meeting recognised this tension by considering irrigation, healthcare, water supply, bridges, roads, optical fibre, electricity and other infrastructure in protected areas, eco-sensitive zones and tiger corridors.

The key mechanism is planning. Chief Minister Fadnavis directed officials to include dam repairs, rehabilitation and desilting in sanctuary management plans. Standard operating procedures are to be prepared within three months. Wildlife officials would be informed in advance, avoiding separate approvals for every routine work. The meeting also considered buffer-village rehabilitation for residents willing to relocate.

Human-wildlife conflict was discussed as a possible natural disaster, but further action depends on reviewing District Collector duties, compensation systems and Forest Department powers. This approach could make decisions faster while keeping oversight. It also shows that conservation policy must connect habitat protection, infrastructure, livelihoods, rehabilitation and conflict compensation.