In December 2025, in Assam’s Chirang district, a social media user uploaded a photograph showing the killing and consumption of a sub-adult male Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis) – a rare grassland-dwelling bird that is listed as ‘critically endangered’ in India. The post triggered widespread outrage among conservationists and nature lovers, with demands for the immediate arrest of those involved and stringent punishment to deter future crimes against wildlife. So far, two individuals connected to the incident have been arrested. During interrogation, they reportedly stated that they had not killed the bird themselves but had purchased it from a local haat or market.The anger and calls for strict punishment are justified and necessary but the incident cannot be reduced to the killing of a single endangered bird. The dominant, kneejerk reaction that focuses exclusively on punishing the immediate perpetrators risks obscuring deeper structural failures. More troublingly, it tends to absolve state agencies and conservation institutions of responsibility, despite their long-standing neglect of wildlife protection beyond formally notified protected areas.At its core, this incident exposes the limitations of India’s prevailing conservation model, one that largely excludes people and prioritises rigid spatial boundaries. In India, the Wildlife (Protection) Act (WPA), 1972, provides for the creation of protected areas such as national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and community reserves, while simultaneously prohibiting people from accessing or using forest resources. Violation of these provisions can lead to arrest and penalisation, including for tribal communities.What the location tells usTwo critical issues emerge from this incident. First, Bengal Floricans are primarily known to reside and breed within well-protected landscapes such as the Bansbari and Bhuyanpara ranges of the Manas National Park (MNP), while their presence and use of other habitats within the park remain comparatively less documented. They are also recorded from Kaziranga and Orang National Parks. Within these protected areas, the species enjoys relatively high levels of security due to sustained conservation efforts by government agencies, wildlife organisations and community institutions. Awareness about the bird and concern for its survival is also significantly higher among fringe communities living around the park.Also read: Remembering Ravi Sankaran, the Indiana Jones of Indian WildlifeSecond, and more importantly, the killing did not occur within the core of MNP. It took place in a buffer village located between the newly-declared Sikhna Jwhwlao National Park (SJNP) and the Kuklung range of MNP.A conservationist, who wished to remain anonymous, noted that a few individuals of Bengal Florican had recently been sighted in grasslands near the Kalamati picnic spot in the Kuklung range. It is plausible that the bird moved from there into Kungring, a human-dominated landscape where the incident occurred.Buffer areas and multi-use landscapes such as these receive far less attention from both the forest department and conservation organisations. Consequently, local awareness of the Bengal Florican’s conservation status is comparatively low. At the same time, there also exists a historical preference for bushmeat, including birds such as jungle fowl, among some tribal communities in the region. Recognising this context does not justify the act but ignoring it makes conservation responses shallow and ineffective.Limits of a protected area-centric modelThis incident reflects a broader global pattern. There is growing evidence that conservation efforts centred solely on protected areas are increasingly inadequate. Studies from Africa show that many protected areas are becoming progressively isolated from surrounding landscapes, disrupting wildlife movement, migration routes, and long-term species survival.Further, research across tropical regions beyond Africa demonstrates that rapid forest loss and land-use change around protected area boundaries are eroding ecological integrity, undermining the long-term capacity of protected areas to conserve biodiversity.The present case mirrors this pattern. While Bengal Floricans may be relatively secure within the core zones of MNP, they remain highly vulnerable once they move into buffer areas and human-dominated landscapes, where conservation attention, resources and enforcement rapidly thin out.Culture, conservation and conflictThere is another dimension that protected area-based conservation tends to overlook. Studies from northeastern states in India show that wildlife hunting is deeply embedded in tribal socio-cultural practices, and conservation interventions that focus narrowly on law enforcement without engaging social and economic realities are unlikely to succeed.This disconnect is further illustrated by an ethnographic work from the Dibang Valley, where Mishmi beliefs that regard tigers as kin come into conflict with top-down, science-driven state conservation frameworks. The study is relevant here because it highlights how conservation approaches that fail to engage with local cultural meanings of wildlife often struggle to secure compliance beyond protected areas.The Bengal Florican killing reflects this gap, too, particularly in buffer landscapes where legal protection exists on paper, but local awareness and legitimacy of conservation norms remain weak.Protecting the critically endangeredThe Bengal Florican is listed as ‘critically endangered’ on the 2018 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species. Native to parts of Cambodia, India, Nepal, and possibly Vietnam, the global population is estimated to be fewer than 1,000 individuals. In India, the species is accorded Schedule I status under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, granting it the highest level of legal protection.Ecologically, the Bengal Florican is a grassland specialist inhabiting lowland dry or seasonally flooded grasslands interspersed with scrub or open forest. During the monsoon, it may undertake short-distance movements into short-grazed grasslands and low-intensity agricultural landscapes when breeding habitats become unsuitable.Way forwardWhile the photograph was likely uploaded to attract social media attention, it exposed deeper systemic issues: the persistence of bushmeat markets, weak enforcement in buffer landscapes, and a conservation approach that concentrates protection within park boundaries while neglecting the spaces in between. It also highlights how public outrage often translates into demands for punishment rather than reflection on institutional responsibility.However, there are alternative pathways. Assam itself offers examples such as the Hargila Army, where community-led conservation has successfully protected the adjutant stork by aligning ecological goals with local values. Within MNP too, conservation groups have begun working with communities to safeguard Bengal Florican habitats, notably in the Koklabari farm area under the Bhuyanpara range.If conservation is to move beyond episodic outrage and reactive policing, it must extend attention to buffer areas, engage seriously with cultural realities, and hold institutions accountable alongside individuals. The killing of the Bengal Florican should not only provoke anger but also compel a rethinking of how conservation is practised in landscapes where people and wildlife inevitably coexist.Michael Islary is a researcher and practitioner working on conservation, livelihoods and governance in northeast India.