At the heart of every wildlife sanctuary lies its core: a stretch of land where the rhythms of nature are allowed to continue undisturbed. These zones are meant to be inviolate—refuges for species pushed to the margins elsewhere, where no road should slice through, no settlement should grow. Around them, buffer zones form a kind of soft edge—places where human presence is permitted, carefully measured in the language of conservation: ecotourism, research, limited resource use.
In India, while core zones are often protected, the buffer is where the lines blur. Here, the challenge lies in balance. Though intended to shield the core, buffer zones frequently face pressure—encroachment, extractive activity, and the creeping loss of habitat. In these contested spaces, the question remains: how much human footprint can a sanctuary bear before its wild heart begins to falter? That question has become more urgent in the case of Sariska Tiger Reserve, where the buffer zone now faces potential compromise. Proposed boundary changes by the Rajasthan government aim to reduce the buffer area and expand the Critical Tiger Habitat (CTH)—a shift that environmentalists fear will not strengthen protection, but instead legitimise increased mining around the reserve’s periphery, accelerating habitat loss in the very space meant to safeguard it.
Buffer zones are a vital component of protected areas worldwide. In conservation, a buffer zone serves as a transitional area between strictly protected core habitats and regions of intensive human use, helping to reduce negative interactions. Many researchers, NGOs, and government agencies support their establishment to safeguard wildlife and ecosystems.
Protected wildlife areas are typically divided into three zones. The core zone is strictly protected, with minimal human activity allowed. Surrounding this is the buffer zone, where low-impact activities such as sustainable resource use, research, environmental education, and regulated tourism are permitted. Finally, the transition zone lies outside the buffer and supports higher levels of human activity, including agriculture and resource use by local communities. This zonation helps balance conservation goals with the needs of people living near protected areas.
"Tiger reserves are structured with a core area—typically a national park or sanctuary—that provides optimal habitat for wildlife, including natural water sources and abundant prey," says Anish Andheria, field biologist, scientist, and President of the Wildlife Conservation Trust (WCT). "Since 1973, significant efforts have been made to ensure these core areas remain inviolate, prioritising wildlife needs. Surrounding the core is a buffer zone, often a reserve forest, that supports both human communities and wildlife."
This buffer, he explains, acts as a protective barrier, mitigating pressures from human activities on the core. "Despite these designs, approximately 35,000 people reside within the core zones, and over 3 million people live in the buffer zones of India's 58 tiger reserves. Additionally, many more live along the corridors connecting these reserves.
The absence of these buffer zones would leave the core areas highly vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures such as forest fires, human-wildlife conflict, poaching, grazing, and the extraction of forest produce. Currently, the forests in the buffer zones fulfil the needs of local communities, enabling the core areas to function as crucial breeding grounds for a diverse range of wildlife, thereby sustaining biodiversity."
According to Kishor Rithe, Director of the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS), the core zones of Tiger Reserves (TRs) must span at least 800 to 1,000 sq km and remain completely inviolate—free from human habitation—for the scientific management and conservation of tiger populations. These core zones serve as critical habitats where human interference must be strictly avoided to ensure minimal disturbance to wildlife.
Buffer zone is an area surrounding a core conservation zone where low-impact activities like sustainable resource use, research, environmental education, development, and regulated tourism are permitted. In support of this, Rithe points to existing guidelines that emphasise the importance of delineating buffer areas around the core zones. Ideally, these buffer zones should cover between 1,000 and 3,000 sq km, proportionate to the size of the core, and act as a protective cushion. Under the Wildlife Protection Act (WPA) of 1972, all 58 designated Tiger Reserves in India are required to include both core and buffer areas.
Forest safaris in 4x4 vehicles are the main form of tourism inside the core areas of tiger reserves, says Andheria. "These vehicles typically carry six to nine tourists. In some reserves like Periyar and Sundarbans, where roads are absent, tourists take boat safaris instead. These wildlife-watching rides run twice daily on fixed routes, lasting three to four hours, with morning safaris slightly longer," he explains.
There is no tourism inside core zones during the three monsoon months, he explains. On average, tourist vehicles are present in the core for a maximum of eight hours per 24-hour cycle. “According to a Supreme Court order, a maximum of 20 per cent of the core area can be used for tourism. However, in many tiger reserves, the actual area utilised is less than that,” he adds.
Strict rules prohibit vehicles from leaving designated routes. The low road density within most core areas allows wild animals to easily avoid tourists if they wish. “The only time when tigers and other wildlife might be disturbed by tourist activity is during the summer months, specifically at water bodies. This is because animals are compelled to visit these water sources to quench their thirst, even when tourist vehicles are present. However, if rules set by the National Tiger Conservation Authority and State Forest Departments are adhered to, there is hardly any negative impact on wildlife ecology or behaviour.”
Addressing recent concerns, Andheria acknowledges a growing perception, especially fueled by viral videos, that safari rides regularly obstruct wild animals. He says this may be true in a few parks—at most ten—but adds that states have introduced effective checks and balances to reduce such pressure. For example, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan have implemented GPS tracking systems to monitor safari vehicle speed and route adherence. Violations can lead to bans on the vehicle, guide, and driver for periods ranging from seven to thirty days. Additionally, some parks use camera traps near water bodies to deter vehicles from approaching resting tigers. According to Andheria, adopting these best practices is essential for any tiger reserve hosting tourists.
Tourism in the buffer zones of Indian wildlife reserves remains a contentious issue, with strong arguments both for and against. While it can generate revenue and support conservation, concerns persist about its potential to disturb wildlife and affect local communities. In May 2025, Uttar Pradesh announced the “Buffer Mein Safar” scheme to promote ecotourism. The Forest and Wildlife Department aims to develop safari routes in buffer zones of tiger reserves such as Dudhwa, Pilibhit, and Uttar Kheri. Semrai Lake, known for migratory birds, is also included.
In July, Rajasthan announced plans to launch tiger safaris inside the core zone of Ramgarh Vishdhari Tiger Reserve starting this October. Despite claims of control, concerns arise over allowing tourism in such a sensitive area. The Tiger Conservation Plan, submitted to the National Tiger Conservation Authority, is nearing approval without apparent objections. Critics argue that increased human activity, vehicles, and noise could disrupt wildlife, especially during breeding seasons. Infrastructure development and waste may further degrade habitats. If not carefully regulated, tourism can heighten human-wildlife conflict, particularly where local communities depend on these areas. Effective enforcement remains a major challenge.
Rithe stresses that any intrusion into core areas, including tourism, can have negative impacts on wildlife. Recognising these concerns, the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) issued guidelines nearly a decade ago advising states to gradually phase out tourism from core areas and instead promote controlled tourism in buffer zones. This recommendation was backed by studies conducted in tiger reserves in Madhya Pradesh, southern India, and Uttarakhand’s Jim Corbett Tiger Reserve, which revealed that tourism had obstructed wildlife corridors and increased the strain on natural resources. These findings highlight the urgent need for stricter management practices. Echoing this sentiment, Rithe affirms, "States must seriously think on this," emphasising that controlled tourism in buffer zones and the protection of core zones from human activity are essential.
