Madhya Pradesh is attempting to turn wildlife tourism from a tiger-sighting economy into a broader conservation and livelihood system. The direction outlined at the Madhya Pradesh Travel Mart-2026 places cheetah rewilding, Chambal dolphins, vulture conservation and emerging forest destinations alongside established tiger reserves, while arguing that tourism should be judged not only by visitor numbers but also by what it delivers to local communities and natural ecosystems.
The shift was discussed during a panel titled “Vibrant Landscapes of India’s Wilds: Wildlife, Community, and Sustainable Tourism in Madhya Pradesh” at the Kushabhau Thakre International Convention Centre. Union tourism secretary Bhuvnesh Kumar said wildlife tourism must move beyond conventional safari experiences and counting visitors. Its success, he said, should be assessed through the benefits reaching local communities and the protection secured for natural ecosystems.
That framing matters because the state’s tourism geography has traditionally been strongly associated with tiger reserves and safari destinations. The report identifies Kanha, Bandhavgarh, Pench, Satpura, Panna and Madhav as established or prominent destinations, while also pointing to Ratapani, Sanjay and Veerangana Durgavati Tiger Reserves and the Chambal region as areas where tourism is being expanded. The proposed model therefore involves both diversification of attractions and wider distribution of tourism activity.
The immediate trigger for this renewed emphasis is not a single new tourism project but a set of conservation achievements and destination opportunities being brought into one tourism narrative. Kuno’s cheetah conservation programme is presented as a prominent example. The birth of five more cubs at Kuno, reported at the travel mart as a recent milestone, has strengthened the possibility of linking rewilding with responsible and educational visitor experiences.
The report does not establish a detailed visitor plan for Kuno or provide a timeline for opening specific experiences. It does, however, show how the state is trying to connect conservation outcomes with tourism without reducing wildlife to a spectacle. The panel’s proposed experiences include dolphin sightings in the Chambal, biodiversity exploration in the Gandhi Sagar region, vulture conservation activities and full-moon boat rides near vulture breeding grounds. These are materially different from a safari itinerary centred on finding one flagship animal.
That distinction is central to the emerging tourism model. A tiger safari offers a high-demand experience built around the possibility of seeing a particular species. The experiences discussed at the travel mart would require visitors to understand habitats, ecological relationships and the work of conservation. The panelists argued that tourists increasingly seek forests, birds, local wildlife, culture, cuisine and village life, rather than only tiger sightings. In this model, the destination is not simply a reserve containing an animal; it is an ecosystem with multiple forms of knowledge and local participation.
The institutional responsibilities are also becoming broader. L. Krishnamurthy, chief executive officer of the Madhya Pradesh Eco-Tourism Development Board, identified tourist safety, trained guides and drivers, and community participation as crucial to future expansion. Tourism secretary and Madhya Pradesh Tourism Board managing director Ilaiyaraja T said the state’s priority was to preserve natural resources while generating employment and livelihood opportunities.
These statements indicate that tourism expansion is being presented as an administrative coordination problem as much as a marketing exercise. A wildlife destination requires trained people who can interpret local landscapes, manage visitors and operate transport safely. It also requires communities to be able to participate in ways that generate income without placing additional pressure on forests, rivers or breeding sites. The supplied report does not provide the size of the training programmes, the number of participating villages or a revenue-sharing formula, so the implementation framework remains only partly defined.
The emphasis on training is particularly important because the proposed diversification increases the range of services and knowledge that destinations must provide. Visitors looking for birdlife, dolphins, vultures, local cuisine or village experiences need guides and storytellers with specialised understanding. The panel highlighted the importance of knowledgeable guides and trained storytellers, suggesting that the quality of interpretation will be a key part of the tourism product rather than an optional add-on.
Kumar also stressed the need for local residents to receive training in hospitality, communication, guiding and other tourism-related services. He described meaningful engagement with communities as essential to sustainable tourism and used the principle of “walking with and connecting to the local community” to explain how tourism revenue could reach villages and support livelihoods.
The language of community prosperity, however, has to be translated into operational arrangements. The report identifies homestays, local cuisine, handicrafts, cultural activities and local employment as possible components of community-centred tourism in destinations such as Kanha, Bandhavgarh, Pench, Satpura, Panna and Madhav. It does not say how many homestays are planned, who will finance upgrades, how local enterprises will be selected or how income will be measured. Those unanswered questions are significant because a tourism model can be geographically local while its economic benefits remain concentrated among outside operators.
The policy landscape described at the travel mart is therefore built around a balance between access and protection. The state wants to create employment and livelihood opportunities, diversify destinations and make conservation achievements visible to visitors. At the same time, the panel repeatedly underlined that growth in visitor numbers must not come at the cost of conservation. The principle is clear, but its enforcement will depend on destination-level rules, trained personnel, visitor management and the ability of institutions to monitor ecological pressure.
The proposed geography also suggests an attempt to distribute demand across more locations. Tourism expansion is being discussed for Ratapani, Satpura, Sanjay and Veerangana Durgavati Tiger Reserves, as well as Chambal and Gandhi Sagar. In theory, a wider network can reduce dependence on a few high-profile destinations and create more opportunities for communities near emerging sites. But the source material does not provide comparative visitor numbers, carrying-capacity assessments or infrastructure data for these areas. It is therefore not possible to establish whether the new destinations currently have the roads, accommodation, guides, safety arrangements or conservation staffing needed for larger visitor flows.
The absence of such numbers is itself an important limitation in assessing the plan. The report records a strategic direction rather than a complete implementation document. It identifies new experiences and official priorities, but does not specify targets for visitors, employment, community revenue, guide training or ecological monitoring. Nor does it provide details of funding allocations, timelines, approvals or institutional agreements for the proposed activities.
That makes the measurement framework especially important. If visitor numbers become the primary indicator, the model could reproduce the pressure associated with mass tourism while using the language of sustainability. If the state instead measures local employment, the participation of villages, income retained locally, guide training, safety performance and ecological conditions, it would be better placed to test whether conservation-linked tourism is working as intended. The Union tourism secretary’s remarks point towards this broader measurement approach, although the supplied report does not indicate whether a formal system has been adopted.
The proposed experiences also carry different operational requirements. Dolphin sightings in the Chambal involve a river landscape and aquatic wildlife. Vulture conservation activities and boat rides near breeding grounds require sensitivity to nesting and breeding areas. Biodiversity experiences in Gandhi Sagar and forest tourism in emerging reserves will depend on access controls and trained interpretation. Treating all of these as interchangeable tourism products would overlook the distinct ecological conditions each destination presents. The panel’s emphasis on responsible and educational experiences recognises that difference, but detailed operating protocols are not provided.
For communities, the opportunity is similarly conditional. Homestays, food, handicrafts and cultural activities can create local economic links to tourism, while guiding and transport can provide additional work. Yet participation requires skills, market access and a reliable flow of visitors. It also requires clarity on who controls tourism services and how communities are represented in decisions affecting their villages and surrounding natural areas. The report establishes that officials see community participation as essential, but it does not show how that participation will be structured.
Madhya Pradesh’s wildlife tourism expansion therefore represents a test of whether conservation can become an organising principle for tourism rather than simply a theme used to promote destinations. Kuno, Chambal, Gandhi Sagar and vulture landscapes broaden the state’s tourism offer, but they also demand a more sophisticated relationship between visitors, institutions, local residents and ecosystems.
The evidence currently confirms a clear policy direction: Madhya Pradesh wants tourism to move beyond tiger safaris, connect conservation with livelihoods and expand into new destinations and wildlife experiences. It does not yet establish the scale, funding, safeguards or monitoring arrangements that will determine whether that ambition can be delivered. The next important milestones will be the practical details of guide and community training, visitor safety systems, destination plans and the measures used to ensure that increased tourism does not undermine the habitats it is intended to support.
