Remembering Valmik Thapar: Friend, Fighter, Force Of Nature
Last Updated:
The tiger has lost its most passionate guardian. But the trail Valmik blazed still runs deep. And we must follow
'I come into the peace of wild things
who do not tax their lives with forethought
of grief. I come into the presence of still water.
And I feel above me the day-blind stars
waiting with their light. For a time
I rest in the grace of the world, and am free."
In the quiet sanctuary of Wendell Berry's lines from 'The Peace of Wild Things", I often find solace. Today, those words return with a new weight, because the man who taught so many of us to seek that peace in the wild is no more. Valmik Thapar, India's most passionate advocate for the tiger and the soul of Ranthambore itself, has passed away.
The news hit hard. For me, it's not just the loss of a conservation icon—it's the loss of a friend of Ranthambore, a place I hold closest to my heart. A fierce voice gone quiet. A presence impossible to replace.
Valmik wasn't just India's tiger man. He was Ranthambore. Not just in a symbolic way—he lived, breathed, and fought for it every single day. Through the awe he inspired in forest guards and guides, in villagers and visitors. Through the stories that clung to the park like mist—of Machli, Noor, Genghis—and of the man who gave us a reason to care.
Valmik started young, in the 1970s. Back then, Ranthambore was a fragile wilderness on the brink. What Valmik saw wasn't just a threat—it was a possibility. He immersed himself in the jungle, studying tigers not just as a researcher but as someone who understood their soul. He watched, he listened, and he wrote it all down—articles, books, and documentaries that brought India's tigers into living rooms and policy rooms alike.
Over the span of four decades, he authored a score of books on wildlife and conservation, including Tiger: The Ultimate Guide and Tiger Fire—the latter an anthology of India's long and layered relationship with the big cat. He presented and co-produced several acclaimed documentaries for the BBC and National Geographic, such as Land of the Tiger, which aired internationally and educated millions on India's wildlife.
He was appointed to India's National Wildlife Board and served on countless conservation committees. In 1987, he founded the Ranthambhore Foundation, an NGO that pioneered community-led conservation and integrated livelihood support with environmental protection—a model that has since been emulated across protected areas in India.
Thapar wasn't just documenting wildlife—he was shaping the national conversation around it. His work bridged the gap between field science, policy, and public imagination in a way few had before him.
And Valmik didn't stop there. He challenged the system. Took on poachers, confronted politicians, and questioned bureaucrats. He wasn't afraid to make enemies if it meant protecting the wild. His roar often echoed louder in Delhi's corridors than in the jungle itself.
Valmik saw conservation not as a job or a science but as a moral calling. A duty. 'I sighted my first tiger at the age of nine in Corbett Park. At 23, it became my obsession, as watching it in the magical setting of Ranthambore mesmerised me like nothing else… Since then, I have served the tiger and will do so till I die," Valmik once told my friend Ina Puri during a rare interview. That devotion shaped everything he did.
When I began working on Ranthambore Diary: 9 Days, 9 Cubs, it was Valmik's shadow that loomed large. His way of seeing—of telling stories that made the wild feel personal—shaped my own journey. The very fact that I could witness and write about nine cubs in nine days is a tribute to what he helped build: a park where tigers still thrive because someone had the vision to fight for them.
In many ways, Ranthambore Diary is rooted in Valmik's legacy. Every photograph I used, every moment I paused to observe rather than chase spectacle, carried echoes of his voice—that insistence on respect, patience, and deep listening. His writings taught me to see not just the beauty of a tiger but also its context: the rustle of the grass, the alarm call of the langur, the tension in the air before a cub emerges from the thicket. Valmik had shown us that documenting wildlife is about intimacy, ethics, and stewardship.
For his part, Valmik never stopped being astonished. In his book, Living with Tigers, he writes, 'I had never seen a tiger chasing a deer in the water. Genghis didn't falter and charged in as sheets of water splashed skywards from the flight of the sambar and the tiger's pursuit of the deer. He missed, but what a spectacle he had created… What I had seen was so intense that it was like being witness to a theatrical extravaganza." That sense of wonder never left Valmik. Nor did his conviction that to conserve tigers was to conserve something deeper—a shared inheritance.
Ranthambore, to me, has never been just a park. It is a living narrative stitched together by decades of watchfulness, with Valmik as its most committed chronicler. Without his tireless advocacy, his fight against poachers and policy lapses, and his insistence on science and storytelling going hand in hand, the park would never have become what it is today.
But Valmik wasn't just about Ranthambore. He advised prime ministers, served on key wildlife boards, and helped shape Project Tiger into what it became, both through his recommendations and his critiques. He wanted better protection but also smarter tourism. He called out the glorified safari culture and pushed for regulation, always keeping the tiger at the centre.
Valmik didn't romanticise the jungle. He talked of vanishing forests, of bureaucratic apathy, of conservation losing its soul to selfies and soundbites. And yet, he kept fighting. Kept believing.
I remember conversations where his eyes would light up while describing a tigress teaching her cubs to hunt. And others where his voice would drop, heavy with grief, recounting lost forests or failed policies. He was never detached. That was his greatest strength— and, sometimes, his burden.
Valmik's passing leaves behind more than silence. It leaves a legacy—of truth-telling, of fierce love, of action. The best way to honour him isn't through grand words. It's by listening to the jungle, and acting when it calls. I had no shortage of stories and anecdotes about him, thanks to another Tiger Man—Dharmendra Khandal — who kept his spirit alive in every tale he told.
The tiger has lost its most passionate guardian. But the trail Valmik blazed still runs deep. And we must follow. My last email exchange with him was in September. I had invited him to a small gathering in Ranthambhore. He graciously replied, saying he would be out of India, visiting his son, who was studying in London. Even in that brief exchange, his warmth came through. That will stay with me—as will his legacy.
A columnist and author, Sundeep Bhutoria is passionate about the environment, education, and wildlife conservation. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views.
tags :
conservation tiger Valmik Thapar Wildlife
Location :
New Delhi, India, India
First Published:
June 03, 2025, 22:55 IST
News opinion Remembering Valmik Thapar: Friend, Fighter, Force Of Nature
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
4 hours ago
- NDTV
United Behind Iran War Effort, Israelis Express Relief At US Bombing
Israelis expressed relief and optimism Sunday after US President Donald Trump ordered air strikes on Iran, 10 days into a war that has widespread public support. Despite daily nerve-shredding trips to bomb shelters and growing damage around the country, Israelis appeared united behind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's move to attack Iran on June 13. Trump's decision to authorise overnight bombing raids on Iran's nuclear facilities has provided further reassurance after more than a week of sorties by the Israeli air force. "The war with Iran was inevitable. You knew it would happen sooner or later," Claudio Hazan, a 62-year-old software engineer, told AFP in central Jerusalem on Sunday. "I hope that it will shorten the war, because otherwise Israel by itself would not stop until they get that Fordo place bombed," he explained, referring to the deeply buried Iranian nuclear site targeted by heavy US bombers overnight. Israelis have hunkered down for the last 10 days, with businesses closed, schools shuttered and people urged to stay home. Few have slept a full uninterrupted night since the conflict erupted due to the screeching missile warnings that flash up on mobile phones at all times of day. "We woke up to a Sunday morning of alarms and then we saw that the US attacked," David, a 43-year-old Jerusalem resident, told AFP. "We're all happy that the US is lending a hand, it has always been lending a hand." Israeli President Isaac Herzog told the BBC on Sunday that "now is an opportunity to come to a dialogue of peace, also a dialogue of peace between all nations in the region, including Israelis and Palestinians". ' God Is With Us' Israel's sophisticated air defences have kept Israeli towns and cities relatively safe, shooting down hundreds of Iranian missiles and drones that would otherwise have caused widespread devastation. Dozens have slipped through, however, with three more impacts reported on Sunday morning in the northern port of Haifa and around the coastal hub of Tel Aviv. At least 50 strikes have been acknowledged nationwide and 25 people have died, according to official figures. When a missile blasted her modern apartment block on Thursday in Ramat Gan, near Tel Aviv, resident Renana lamented to AFP that "it will take a long time until this building recovers." But she showed no rancour towards Netanyahu who has deployed Israeli forces in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now Iran since the attack on Israel by Palestinian group Hamas in October 2023. "The truth is that God is with us and the government should go on with whatever they're doing, which is exactly what should have been done a long time ago," Renana, who did not give her surname, told AFP. 'Sharp Contrast' Israel's usually divided political scene has also lined up behind the attack on Iran, a country generations of Israelis have grown up fearing as a threat to their existence. "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is my political rival, but his decision to strike Iran at this moment in time is the right one," opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote in a Jerusalem Post op-ed last week. A survey carried out by the Israel Democracy Institute in the days immediately after Israel's first strikes on June 13 found that 70 percent of Israelis supported the war, although the results revealed a major divide. Among Jewish Israelis, there was 82 percent support, while only 35 percent of respondents from Israel's Arab minority, who mostly identify as Palestinian, were in favour. Dahlia Scheindlin, an Israeli pollster and political analyst, told AFP that Israelis were much more united behind the Iran campaign than the grinding conflict in Gaza which many saw as a "dirty war". Netanyahu has been criticised for failing to secure the return of Israeli hostages being held by Hamas and accused of prolonging the war for domestic political purposes. He is also subject to an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes in Gaza where nearly 56,000 people have been killed, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory. "There's a very sharp contrast between how Israelis view the war in Gaza and how they view this war with Iran," Scheindlin said. She cautioned, however, that sentiment could change if it turns into a long conflict.
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
US strikes Iran: How legendary 88-year-old reporter Seymour Hersh scooped that Donald Trump would attack Iranian nuclear sites
In an age where news breaks on social media feeds faster than newsroom alerts, it wasn't CNN, BBC or The New York Times that first reported the United States' military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It was Seymour Hersh. Yes, that Seymour Hersh—the 88-year-old Pulitzer-winning investigative reporter, best known for uncovering the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam and the Abu Ghraib prison abuses in Iraq. And now, in the summer of 2025, the veteran journalist has done it again—beating major media outlets and intelligence briefings by publishing details of the Trump administration's plan to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, nearly 48 hours before the world knew it had actually happened. The Scoop On June 19, Hersh published a detailed report via his Substack newsletter, claiming that US B-2 bombers and naval platforms were preparing a "coordinated assault" on Iran's underground nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The piece cited unnamed sources in the intelligence community who warned that the operation was imminent and being conducted with minimal oversight from Congress or America's NATO allies. At the time, most dismissed it as another speculative post from a journalist long estranged from the legacy media. But by June 22, when US President Donald Trump went on record confirming the strikes—calling the targets 'obliterated'—Hersh had already been vindicated. The Attack The strikes, launched late on June 21, targeted three high-profile Iranian nuclear facilities. While initial reports from state media in Iran downplayed the damage, satellite imagery and eyewitness accounts suggested precision airstrikes had indeed hit deep underground bunkers at Fordow and Natanz, as well as key infrastructure in Isfahan. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Yet despite the intensity of the operation, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported no significant radiation spikes, prompting speculation that either: Iran had preemptively moved or buried sensitive material, or The sites were largely non-operational or decoy facilities. Either way, it challenged Trump's claim of having 'wiped out' Iran's nuclear capability. Déjà Vu: From Nord Stream to Natanz Hersh's report bore eerie similarities to his controversial 2023 scoop on the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, which he attributed to US covert operations. At the time, mainstream outlets largely ignored the piece, but subsequent leaks from German and Nordic investigations lent circumstantial credibility to his claims. The Iran story followed a similar arc: initial media silence, public disbelief, and then abrupt confirmation—except this time, the stakes involved possible nuclear escalation in the Middle East. The Media Gap Hersh's scoop once again spotlights the widening chasm between traditional journalism and independent reporting. A 2023 study by the Reuters Institute found that 62% of US adults now rely on social media, newsletters, and independent platforms for breaking news—often citing speed, authenticity, and ideological distrust of legacy media. Hersh, for his part, has long been critical of what he calls the 'lapdog press'—journalists too embedded in officialdom to question military narratives or dig beneath the surface. His latest work only reinforces that critique. Even defenders of legacy media recognize the challenge. In late 2024, Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post, penned a stirring op‑ed titled 'The hard truth: Americans don't trust the news media,' in which he conceded: 'Reality is an undefeated champion. … We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It's a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement.' Bezos's admission—calling out both accuracy and credibility—served as a tacit acknowledgment that even powerful legacy outlets are circling back to the same core demand: fearless, truthful reporting, just as Hersh delivers time and again. What Next? Iran, for now, has not confirmed the full extent of the damage but has vowed to retaliate 'at a time and place of its choosing.' Meanwhile, in Washington, Trump faces minimal political backlash, with key GOP figures framing the strike as a 'preemptive blow' to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb. But the bigger story might be this: Seymour Hersh, nearly nine decades old, once again scooped the world. In an era of TikTok pundits and algorithm-fed outrage, his dogged reliance on old-school sourcing—combined with new-age platforms like Substack—has given him a second act few journalists ever get. Legacy vs Longevity While major networks scrambled to confirm what Hersh had already written, one truth remained clear: in the information war, experience still matters. Hersh's longevity in investigative reporting—not in spite of, but because of his outsider status—continues to disrupt the cosy, slow-moving machinery of legacy media. The attack on Iran may or may not spark a wider conflict. But Hersh's scoop has already ignited a different kind of reckoning—one about where we get our news, and who we still trust to tell us the truth.
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
‘Iran's nuclear program hit substantially', says Israel president Isaac Herzog; calls US strike a ‘brave decision'
. Israel's President Isaac Herzog has said Iran's nuclear programme has been 'hit substantially' following the recent US airstrike, though he admitted full details are still emerging. Speaking to the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg, Herzog described the US decision to strike Iranian nuclear facilities as 'historic' and 'brave'. Pressed on whether Iran's nuclear capabilities have been fully dismantled, Herzog responded, 'I don't know the details, but it's quite clear to me that the Iranian nuclear program has been hit substantially.' When asked if Israel had directly requested US President Donald Trump to launch the attack, Herzog denied making any such request. 'We decided to leave it to the Americans,' he said, adding that he himself was unaware of the strike in advance. 'I was woken up when it happened,' Herzog revealed. Asked whether Israel would now halt its own attacks on Iran, Herzog avoided a direct answer. 'Iran is firing missiles at Israeli territory,' he said. 'We have to do whatever it takes to defend ourselves against missiles.' Calling for broader diplomatic coordination, Herzog emphasized the need for a long-term resolution: 'The way to do it is of course to deal with it on an international level and make sure that there is an exit strategy.'
