Project lion

project lion

1. PROJECT LION
The Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project is an initiative of
the Indian Government to provide safeguards to the Asiatic
lion (Panthera leo leo) from extinction in the wild by means
of reintroduction. The last wild population of the Asiatic lion
is found in the region of Gir Forest National Park, in the state
of Gujarat. The single population faces the threats
of epidemics, natural disasters and other anthropogenic
factors. The project aims to establish a second independent
population of Asiatic lions at the Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary in
the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh. However, the proposed
translocation has been bitterly contested by the state
government.

2. The distribution of Asiatic lion, once found widely in West
and South Asia, dwindled to a single population in the Gir
Forest National Park and Wildlife Sanctuary in India. The
population at Gir declined to 18 animals in 1893 but increased
due to protection and conservation efforts to 284 in 1994.The
Gir Wildlife Sanctuary is now highly overpopulated with
lions, the 2015 census showed the strength to be 523 lions.
There are numerous deaths in the population annually because
of ever increasing competition between the human and animal
overcrowding. Asiatic lion prides require large territories but
there is limited space at Gir wildlife sanctuary, which is
boxed in on all sides by heavy human habitation. Gir lions
have started moving outwards from the sanctuary and
establishing homes outside the protected areas. The lions are
now spread over 16,000 square kilometres (6,200 sq mi) in
the vicinity of 1050 villages in three contiguous districts -
Amreli, Bhavnagar and Junagadh.

INTRODUCTION

3. The Gir Protected Area in Gujarat, India, is the last remaining
shelter of the Asian lion (Panthera leo persica). This article
presents different visions on lion conservation and ecosystem
management practices of the Maldhari people. We analysed
how these could be incorporated in the management of local
wildlife. The field study was undertaken in the state of
Gujarat, India, over a period of 2 months in 2003 and 1 month
in 2008. Data were collected through individual semi-
structured interviews with 35 villagers living at the periphery
of the Gir National Park. Group discussions were also
organised with villagers living inside this protected area. The
socio-economic repercussions of conservation on the
Maldharis' livelihood were assessed by analysing factors such
as access to basic needs, land use and natural resources in the
forest. Changes within the Maldhari households resulting
from delocalisation policies were also analysed. Results show
that the cultural values of the Maldharis play an important
role in maintaining the area's ecological balance. Interview
results highlight how the majority of the Maldharis, especially
the elderly, consider the lions to be an integral part of their
environment. This article shows that interactions between the
lions and humans still represent an important aspect of the
culture and local history of the Maldharis. It is important to
rethink the current top-down conservation approach by
adopting a more collaborative approach that integrates the
vision on lion conservation of both park authorities and local
communities.
THE AIMS OF THIS STUDY ARE THREEFOLD :

4. • First is to analyse the top-down conservation approach
present in Gir by showing the impact of the current
conservation policy on the cultural heritage of the
Maldharis and their livelihoods.
• Second is to analyse the different perceptions of the
interrelationships between lions and human beings and the
visions of wildlife management practices held by the
Maldharis.
• Third is to discuss the possibilities of a more collaborative
approach in wildlife conservation that integrates the vision
and values of both park authorities and local communities.



HISTORY
The field study was undertaken in Gir National Park, over a
period of 3 months in 2003 and 2008. The data were collected
through individual interviews and discussion groups with
selected members of the Maldhari communities. Individual

5. interviews were also carried out with officers of the Forest
Department in Gir and with members of two local NGOs.
The Gir Protected Area is located in the western part of the
Indian state of Gujarat and covers a total forest area of
1882.64 km
2
, and it was created in 1965. Including a
sanctuary of 1153 km
2
, it comprises various reserved forests
that had been declared as protected areas since 1882. The
terrain is rugged, hilly (altitudes between 152 and 530 m
above sea level) and palaeotropical, with dry deciduous and
thorn forests as well as shrub land and some wetland biomes.
There are 81 common tree species, dominated in some parts
by teak (Tectona grandis), 48 species of herb and shrub and
15 species of grass. Due mainly to past incidents of logging,
grazing and fire, many parts of the forest have changed from
its original plant cover and are now dominated by thorny and
poisonous plants.
The park of Gir has numerous distinct faunal species, with
approximately 320 species of mammal, 300 species of bird,
26 species of reptile and more than 2000 species of insect.
The carnivorous group mainly comprises the Asian lion
(Panthera leo persica), leopard (Panthera pardus), jungle cat
(Felis chaus), hyena (Hyaena hyaena) and jackal (Cuon
alpinus). The main herbivores are represented by the chital
(Axis axis), nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus), sambar
(Cervus unicolor) and chinkara (Gazella bennettii). Among
the smaller mammals, porcupine and hare are common but the
pangolin is rare. The reptiles are represented by the mugger
marsh crocodile (highest population among all protected areas
in India); Indian star tortoise and monitor lizard can be found
in the water areas of the sanctuary. Snakes are found in the
bushes and forest, and pythons are sighted frequently along
the stream banks. Gir has been used by the Gujarat State

6. Forest Department, which adopted the Indian Crocodile
Conservation Project in 1977 and released approximately
1000 marsh crocodiles, which had been raised in the Gir
Rearing Centre, into the Kamaleshwar Lake, other reservoirs
and small water bodies in and around Gir.
The first effort to protect the Asian lion took place in 1900,
when the nawab (local prince of Gujarat) forbade the hunting
of lions on his land. In 1911, all sport hunting activity was
officially forbidden by the English administration (Singh
2000Singh, M. Issues for integrated management plan for
Gir. Paper presented at: The National Workshop on Regional
Planning for Conservation and Development, Gir
Conservation Area. Nov7–92000. Ahmedabad India: Wildlife
Institute of India and GFD. There are roughly 55 traditional
houses (nesses) of Maldharis, a local population who live
inside this protected zone. Most of the Maldharis who lived in
the Gir region were forced to leave in relocation programmes
between 1973 and 1987. After this relocation, which was
imposed by the local conservation authorities, only 360
households remained in the forest. The Maldharis who still
live in close contact with the lions and the wild fauna are
mostly shepherds and mainly practise subsistence economy,
living on the sale of buffalo milk, which is sold in Sasan in
the district of Junagadh and in adjacent regions. The Maldhari
population also practises agro-forest activities and marginal
agriculture, cultivating mainly wheat, rice, mango and cotton.
The ecosystems transformed by human activity are also
constituted by plots left for grazing purposes, most of which
are highly exploited because of the lack of appropriate
planning measures.
Field research was conducted in the Gir National Park,
Gujarat, during August and September 2003 and in July 2008.

7. Thirty-five semi-structured interviews were carried out
among a cross section of the communities living at the
periphery of the Gir National Park in the villages of Kadell
and Alavani. In an attempt to select a representative sample of
village society, parameters such as gender, age and economic
conditions were taken into account. The economic
background was evaluated on the basis of average monthly
income and the number of livestock owned by the household
of the interviewee. The age of interviewees ranged between
25 and 68 years. Due to social and cultural norms,
interviewing women was hindered because of the status of
being an ‘outsider’ to the community. As a result, two-thirds
of the interviewees (i.e. 23 individuals) were men. Half of the
villagers interviewed were selected using a snowball
technique, which means that the person interviewed was
referred by another person. In order to reduce the pitfalls
associated with this sampling method, the other part of the
group was matched with a sample of 10 randomly selected
members of the community.
The impact of the current conservation policies on Maldharis'
livelihoods was assessed by asking villagers questions
regarding access to basic social services, different land uses
and access to natural resources in the forest. The presence of
possible social changes within Maldhari households was also
analysed. The different perceptions of interrelationships
between lions and local communities were investigated by
asking questions regarding the possible complementarities
between humans, livestock and wildlife. Questions regarding
the use of the ecosystem and different resource use between
lions and livestock were also explored.
Some of the interviewees, especially the elderly and women,
were not very comfortable with expressing their opinions

8. about Forest Department officials. This could be explained by
the presence of unequal power relations that characterised the
relationship between villagers and forest authorities.
Nevertheless, having understood the neutrality of my position
and being assured that the name of interviewees would not be
disclosed, the villagers became progressively more confident
and ready to share their point of view during the interviews.
Two group discussions were also carried out in order to
complement and cross-check the data previously collected in
the individual interviews with randomly selected villagers. In
order to facilitate interaction between the members, the
groups consisted each of 12 villagers who were not previously
interviewed. The age of these villagers ranged between 28
and 62 years and the majority were men (17 out of 24). The
main topic addressed in these groups was the local perception
of conservation activities undertaken by the authorities in the
protected area and the socio-economic impact of relocation of
the human settlements outside Gir. In an attempt to
compensate for the lack of cultural and linguistic background
that can only come with long-term commitment in a specific
community, four local interpreters of the same ethnic group as
the interviewees were employed. Two of them, recruited with
the support of the District Rural Development Agency
(DRDA), a governmental organisation in the area that tries to
promote integrated development programmes for the
Maldharis, were field workers with previous professional
experience among Maldhari villagers. Being aware of the fact
that translation from different backgrounds may facilitate
access to different social groups, two English-speaking
villagers were also recruited. Moreover, to protect
respondents' privacy, we ensured that interpreters who
assisted in translation lived in different villages from the
interviewees. All the interviews were recorded and

9. transcribed in Gujarati. These scripts were subsequently
translated into English and the two versions were compared
for data triangulation.
Additionally, open-ended, in-depth interviews were carried
out with seven officers of the Forest Department of the
reserve, three members of DRDA, a local governmental
organisation, and an activist of Saurashtra Paryavaran
Sanrakshan Samiti (SPSS), a local NGO that works with the
Maldharis. These interviews lasted approximately 1 h and
were carried out in English. The topics of these interviews
concerned the conservation policies undertaken and the risks
to which the lions in Gir were confronted. Special emphasis
was put on the issue of the impact of human activities in Gir
and the issue of Maldhari relocation policies in this protected
area.
Biodiversity conservation in India, as in most parts of the
world, is a complex and often contentious issue. What on the
surface appears to be a simple issue of protecting wild
animals and plants from forces beyond their control, on closer
inspection quickly dissolves into a complex tangle of
conflicting issues – human rights versus the protection of
animals and forests; the exclusion of humans from protected
areas versus the possibility of human coexistence with
wildlife; and exclusive state control over protected areas
versus increased local participation in protected area
management. In Gir, restrictions imposed on the Maldharis by
the forest authorities and the delocalisation programme pose a
severe threat not only to their economic security but also to
their culture and identity.
Due to the complexity of conservation of an endangered
species such as the Asiatic lion, the answer to the question
of how and by whom biodiversity should be protected must be

10. based on an interactive dialogue between local populations
and conservation authorities. This is vital in order to
understand the expectations and potential contribution of local
communities, such as the Maldharis. This is especially
important since forest officers have a tendency to project their
own categories and priorities on local populations, showing
them their best way forward, as in the case of relocation. The
case study presented shows how, in the case of the Maldharis,
the cultural system is characterised by a concept of nature, in
which humans are part of nature. One important lesson from
the Maldhari communities in Gir is that values and beliefs are
important in encoding the ethics of wildlife conservation. The
use of emotionally powerful cultural symbols, such as the
lion, is important to implement a moral code. In accordance
with these authors and the cultural ecology school of thought,
the case study shows that the incorporation of values and
beliefs into biodiversity conservation efforts is more likely to
succeed than the use of purely scientific and ecological
arguments.
The replies of the Maldharis show the existence of reciprocal
ties that bind humans with the lion. It is important to highlight
the fact that approaches to conserving biodiversity that are
based on cultural values are often much more sustainable than
those based only on legislation or regulation. Examining
environmental relations and constructions of nature from a
cross-cultural perspective would not only deepen
understanding of indigenous perceptions but also provide
insights into cultural implications of the conservation
approaches adopted by local authorities. Such a paradigmatic
shift needs to emerge if the complexity of ecological and
social relationships underlying processes of biodiversity loss
is to be approached and effective solutions to environmental
problems found.

11. The Wildlife Institute of India (WII) began studying the
Asiatic lion in its habitat in from 1986 onwards and collected
fundamental data about the lion, its feeding, use of habitat and
ranging habits. Key findings of the study were that the lions
largely preyed upon wild herbivores such as sambar (Rusa
unicolor) and chital (Axis axis) and that the size of home
range was 70 square kilometres (27 sq mi) for females and
140 square kilometres (54 sq mi) for the males. In 1990, the
WII proposed the creation of a second wild population of
Asiatic lions to safeguard the species against potential
calamities in Gujarat's Gir National Park.
1993 PHVA REPORT
In 1993, a workshop was held on the Population and Habitat
Viability Assessment (PHVA) of Asiatic lion and the report
was presented to the state forest departments in Vadodara,
Gujarat. State forest departments were asked to suggest
suitable sites for reintroduction and provide the basic
ecological data.
During the workshop, a number of teams were formed to
focus on varied aspects of the conservation biology of the
Asiatic lion such as monitoring, habitat (further subdivided
into Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan sub-groups),
population modelling, prey-base requirements, lion-human
interactions, translocation, captive zoo animals, public
education, veterinary, reproductive and genetic aspects etc.
The sites were assessed and ranked for suitability as follows:
 Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary - found most suitable for
reintroduction.
 Sita Mata Wildlife Sanctuary - later rejected due to human
interference and inadequate prey population.

12.  Darrah-Jawahar Sagar Wildlife Sanctuary - later rejected
due to degraded habitat and unsuitable geography.
 Kumbhalgarh Wildlife Sanctuary - assessed as having
limited area, unsuitable terrain, limited water and prey base
as well as disturbance.
 Barda Wildlife Sanctuary - assessed as having scarcity of
water, prey and forage, as well as encroachment and
disturbance.
The PHVA report strongly favoured the scientific
management of reintroduction of Asiatic lions to another site:
The overwhelming consensus of the Workshop was that an
alternative habitat for the Asiatic lion must be established
with all possible speed, but without compromise of the
accepted strategies and principles governing systematic and
scientific reintroduction. This should be done simultaneously
with strengthening effective protection and management of
the Gir Forest and assuring the viability of the captive
population and alternative genetic resources.
The PHVA deliberations were followed by visits to the three
most promising site, viz Kuno, Darrah-Jawaharsagar and
Sitamata WLS by a survey team of WII headed by Dr Ravi
Chellam. The team evaluated sites over various parameters
and compared the same with respect to Gir Forest for
determining the suitability of sites. They presented their
findings in 1995 to the Government of India and the state
forest departments. WII researchers confirmed that the
Palpur-Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary was the most promising
location to re-establish a free ranging population of the
Asiatic lions and in 2007 certified it ready to receive its first
batch of translocated lions.
The framework of the Lion Introduction Project emerged
from the transformation of a Monitoring Committee, set up by

13. the Government of India, which met on 10 March 2004 for
effective implementation of the reintroduction at Kuno.
At the meeting the WII Site Survey was examined and it was
understood that Kuno Palpur Sanctuary was the most suitable
site for reintroduction. The Committee formulated a three
phase framework for the conservation project to last for two
decades as follows: During the first phase, slated from 1995-
2000, the 24 villages would be shifted out of the sanctuary
and the habitat would be improved.
 The second phase would last from 2000 to 2005 and would
include fencing off of the lion reintroduction site, the actual
trans-location, as well as research and monitoring.
 The final phase III would last from 2005 to 2015 and would
focus on eco-development of the region.
At that point in time, the project was in Phase II and 18 of the
24 villages had been rehabilitated from Kuno. The refusal of
Gujarat state to provide lions was mentioned during this
meeting by the Chief Wildlife Warden of Gujarat. A number
of steps were approved with consensus which included the
engaging of the Gujarat State Government as to the necessity
of the project, preparation of a trans-location road map, fresh
assessment of prey base of Kuno by WII and continued
funding support for welfare measures and habitat
improvement for the existing fauna at Kuno.

ESTABLISHING THE WILDLIFE SANCTUARY
The Madhya Pradesh state forest department notified 345
square kilometres (133 sq mi) of the Kuno Palpur area as a
Wildlife Sanctuary in 1981. In April 2002, a separate Wildlife
Division was established for Kuno, effectively increasing the

14. protected area for wildlife to 1,268.861 square kilometres
(489.910 sq mi).
REHABILITATION OF VILLAGERS
Twenty four villages of the Sahariya tribe, comprising 1545
families, were moved out from the core area and rehabilitated
by the state government with assistance from the Central
Government. Due to a paucity of suitable revenue lands in the
vicinity of Kuno, the state government proposed relocating
the villages on degraded protected forests, a move approved
by the Ministry Of Environment And Forests (MOEF) of the
Government of India, which granted its approval under
Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act (1980) for diversion
of 3,395.9 hectares (8,391 acres). By 2002-2003, all 24
villages and the identified families were relocated outside
Kuno and the former village area converted into grasslands.
The Madhya Pradesh state government informed the Supreme
Court that each family was given 2 hectares (4.9 acres) of
cultivable land, in addition to 500 square metres (600 sq yd)
for housing along with building constructional material
costing Rs 1,00,000/- per house. The net outflow to the
Central Government was Rs.15 crores.
Major gaps remain in the implementation of the rehabilitation
measures, with villagers alleging that they have got little of
the rehabilitation package they were promised. The negative
economic impact of the displacement to villagers from Kuno
sanctuary has raised a controversy over the merits of species
preservation via dislocation of human populations living
inside Protected Areas. NGO’s, such as the Samrakshan Trust
have been working for better rehabilitation of villagers who
agreed to move out of the Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary.
OPPOSITION BY THE GUJARAT GOVERNMENT

15. In 2004, the state government refused to part with the first
pride of 19 animals planned for relocation. The state
considers the lions as "heritage of the state" and the issue of
handing over lions has become a political issue. Mangubhai
Patel, then State Forest Minister, went on record to state that:
There is no need to shift lions from Gir. We will ensure
their survival here.
As early as 2009, the continued opposition of the Gujarat
state government led to the Madhya Pradesh Forest
Department's exploration of the possibility of procuring
zoo-bred Asiatic lions and shifting them and their
descendants to Palpur-Kuno.
The Gujarat state government has, over time, made various
arguments against translocating lions to Madhya Pradesh
(MP), such as that the Kuno sanctuary was not suitable lion
habitat and that it had inadequate prey base, that MP had
been unable to provide adequate protection to tigers in its
Panna National Park and the lions if reintroduced there
would be in danger, that the proposed introduction if
Southern African cheetas to Kuno rendered it unsuitable for
lion reintroduction.
The Gujarat State Wildlife Department proposed new
homes for lions in the Barda wildlife sanctuary
and Bhavnagar Amreli forest instead. Gir's lions have
spread beyond the protective area and the measures of the
state to engage this phenomenon are being portrayed as
providing adequate dispersal to the lion population to
prevent disease. Gujarat also played an emotional card by
declaring before the Supreme Court that the lion was
inextricably bound to the culture of Gujarat and that it was
a "family member", hence could not be provided for
translocation to Kuno.

16. This stand of Gujarat suffered a setback when on 15 April
2013, The Supreme court of india acknowledged
translocation to Kuno as being in the best interest of the
species and rejected the Gujarat Government's objections,
instead ordering the translocation to be carried out within
six months. A bandh was called in the villages adjoining
the Sasan Gir region on 18 April 2013 protesting the
Supreme Court decision.

SUPREME COURT VERDICT AND AFTERMATH
In light of the State Government of Gujarat's refusal to
permit the reintroduction of Asiatic lions, a writ petition
was filed in 1995 by the Centre for Environment Law and
WWF-I in the Indian Supreme Court to get the Gujarat
State Government to release a few prides of Asiatic lions
for the Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary. The Indian Supreme
Court fast-tracked the case and delivered a judgement on
16 April 2013 permitting the reintroduction of lions to
Kuno, over-ruling the objections of the Gujarat
Government.
The Gujarat Government filed on 1 July 2013 for a review
in the Supreme Court of its 16 April ruling. In its petition,
the Gujarat state government claimed that "top carnivores
have never been successfully translocated". The state has
put forward the argument that translocation would break
social bonds between members of groups or prides, which
are vital for lion survival. The reported presence of tiger
cubs in Palpur-Kuno was emphasised, saying that it could
result in conflict between these top predators. The state
proposed, instead, a second home for lions within Gujarat
itself, claiming it would have numerous advantages
including being in tune with international guidelines. The

17. continued reluctance of the state to part with lions for
translocation has come under criticism from prominent
environmentalists.
Post the verdict, fears have been voiced by Gujarati
environmentalists over the gun culture of Madhya Pradesh
and number of firearms in Sheopur, the region where the
Kuno Palpur sanctuary is located and it is suggested that
translocation to such an area would be in violation of IUCN
norms on the subject. With the release of IUCN guidelines
on translocation, opponents of the project have cited from
the provisions and also claimed that the history of
translocations especially in India is dismal and hence
translocation is not favoured. The natural spread of over-
populated lions from an original range of over 1,412 square
kilometres (545 sq mi) to an area extending over 10,500
square kilometres (4,100 sq mi), is considered to mitigate
against the risk of epidemic disease.

2014
The Gujarat's government's curative petition against
relocation of the wild Asiatic lions from the Gir Forest to
Madhya Pradesh was dismissed by the Supreme Court on
14 August 2014. In the face of continued opposition, the
Madhya Pradesh government is considering an alternate
plan to release zoo-bred lions
from Hyderabad and Sakkarbaug, a move which has been
criticised in the light of the deaths of two newly
translocated zoo-bred lions in the safari park at
Etawah, Uttar Pradesh.
After the dismissal of the Gujarat State petition, two NGOs
from Gujarat have filed separate petitions against the
translocation order, one on the grounds that certain relevant
facts have not been brought to the notice of the apex court,

18. the other stating that the importance of Kuno-Palpur as a
corridor for migrating tigers between Ranthambore
National Park in Rajasthan and Madhav National Park in
Madhya Prdesh had been downplayed.
2017
As of December 2017, Madhya Pradesh still has not
received lions from Gujarat. For this reason, it may have
given up on trying to acquire them.
2018
As of October 2018, the lions were still in Gujarat, and 23
of them were found dead. 4 of them had died of the
infection which killed several East African lions in
the Serengeti ecoregion, the canine distemper virus.
TRANSLOCATION PLAN WITHIN GUJARAT
The plan is to reintroduce a pride or two of wild, free-
ranging Asiatic lions from Gir Forest in the neighboring
Indian state of Gujarat to start with.
In compliance with the Supreme Court order of 15 April
2013, the Ministry of Environment and Forests has
constituted a panel for deciding the best course of action in
translocation of animals to Gir. The panel comprises 12
members including member secretary National Tiger
Conservation Authority, the Chief Wildlife Wardens of
Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, member Wildlife Institute of
India, and scientists Drs Ravi Chellam, Y.V. Jhala, NK
Ranjeet Singh and PR Sinha. The panel will advice both the
states on technical aspect of transloction, decide the
composition of animals to be translocated, select the prides
and animals, supervise the translocation, monitor it and
periodically report to the Ministry. During the first
deliberations on 29 July 2013, the panel acceded the need

19. to follow the recent IUCN translocation guidelines but
brushed aside Gujarat's objections against the process. A
two-member team comprising Dr Ravi Chellam and Dr
Y.V. Jhala has been set up to decide the translocation
protocol and report within six weeks. Gujarat objected to
meeting of the 12-member panel on 29 July 2013 before its
petition had been reviewed and also to the presence of tiger
experts on the panel, claiming that lion experts from
Gujarat had been ignored, however that petition was
rejected by the Supreme Court.
In a further development, in April 2015, the Union
government has admitted that Madhya Pradesh will have to
enlarge the wildlife sanctuary's size, from 349 square
kilometres (135 sq mi) to 700 square kilometres
(270 sq mi) in order to implement the translocation of the
Asiatic lions to Kuno-Palpur from Gujarat's Sasan Gir, a
suggestion made in the original project report. This is the
first time that the Government of India has accepted that
the sanctuary needs to be enlarged. However, the expansion
would require the relocation of several big villages, a move
the Madhya Pradesh government is not keen to undertake.
The Madhya Pradesh Forest Department is of the view that
the present sanctuary area and its buffer total over
700 km
2
and are therefore adequate, but have made no
mention of notifying the buffer zone area also as a
sanctuary.
In a reversal of position, the Ministry of Environment and
Forests decided in a meeting in June 2015 against
translocation at present on the grounds that it would be
detrimental to the breeding and survival of the lions as they
lived in social prides. The turn-around of stance has been
attributed by environmentalists supporting the translocation
to Narendra Modi who had as Chief Minister of Gujarat

20. stated that the lion was the pride of Gujarat and had
publicly declared his opposition to the transfer of lions
outside the state.