Rare Indian grey wolf killed by shepherds in Bahawalpur
A rare Indian grey wolf has been killed by shepherds near Bahawalpur, raising alarm among conservationists about the safety of endangered species in Pakistan's rural regions.
Deputy Chief Wildlife Ranger Syed Ali Usman confirmed that local shepherds tracked and killed the animal in a rural area. The carcass has been recovered and sent for post-mortem.
Authorities are investigating the incident under the Punjab Protected Areas Act 2020 (Amended 2025) and have pledged to file a case once the suspects are identified.
The Indian grey wolf (Canis lupus pallipes) is an endangered subspecies native to dry and semi-arid regions of South Asia. Slightly smaller and more elusive than its European relatives, the animal rarely enters human settlements unless its habitat is disturbed or food sources run dry.
Experts say local herders often see wolves as threats to livestock, which leads to conflicts and retaliatory killings.
'This isn't just the loss of one animal—it's the loss of ecological balance,' said Badr Munir, conservationist and member of the Punjab Wildlife Management Board. He emphasised the wolf's key role as a top predator.
He added that habitat loss and shrinking food sources often drive such predators toward villages.
Conservation groups have condemned the killing and are calling for stronger protection laws and public education campaigns to reduce human-wildlife conflict.
They urge government bodies to engage with rural communities and promote coexistence strategies before more wildlife is lost.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
20 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Exceptionalism versus state credibility
Listen to article The literally en mass convictions (related to the May 9, 2023 protests) on account of terrorism and the resultant disqualifications of several PTI stalwarts including Omar Ayub, Shibli Faraz, Senator Ejaz Chaudhry, MNA Muhammad Ahmad Chattha and Punjab Assembly opposition leader Ahmad Khan Bhachar by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) exemplify a new brand of exceptionalism. Exceptionalism is a term often associated with the policies of the United States and its European allies in defending their interests, regardless of logic or morality. However, Pakistan has also been experiencing exceptionalism of a different kind in recent years. The ongoing terrorism in Balochistan and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa provinces, the state's narrative against violence and the disqualification of PTI MPs suggest exceptional approaches. Are these routine occurrences or consequences of Pakistan's exceptionalism in recent years? Ayub, Faraz, Chaudhry, Chattha and Bhachar were sentenced to 10 years in prison each under anti-terrorism charges related to the May 9 protests and riots. Their convictions were not surprising. Similarly, an opposition MP in the Punjab Assembly, Rana Shahbaz Ahmad, recently questioned the institution of multiple cases against him under the Anti-Terrorism Act. While holding the Holy Quran, he asked other MPs if he looked like a terrorist. This context fits the term exceptionalism, which denotes selective application of laws, subversion of regulations for expedience and socio-political discrimination in favour of certain groups. This approach distorts governance, stunts the rule of law and raises questions about the conduct of state institutions, which often claim to uphold the rule of law and justice for all but engage in actions that contradict their exhortations to the public. Exceptionalism undermines the state's integrity and authority by discrediting narratives against non-state actors. While certain segments face state-sponsored wrath and attacks on rights, the official advocacy for justice, equality and expectation of loyalty to the state loses credibility. Rhetoric on the rule of law becomes meaningless when protectors of state lands ally with lawbreakers and land grabbers. Citizens doubt the rule of law when state institutions turn a blind eye to political, non-political or religious groups intruding on public spaces, occupying green areas and disregarding laws. When religio-political groups are seen as tools for power politics, the state loses credibility. Can the rule of law thrive without action against anti-state elements? If the status quo persists and short-sighted policies continue, threats from within will also persist. State institutions use parties and individuals as socio-political crutches, disregarding the fact that most hosts (mosque/madrassas) and their guests (often militants/insurgents of different shades) are actually ideological partners. Many mosques and madrassas run by factions of mainstream parties serve as conduits and shelters for proxy terrorists but state institutions can't dare check them out. Such duplicity and inaction — a kind of exceptionalism vis a vis certain groups — also drain investors' confidence and casts doubt on the intent against terrorist groups. Even China's strategic patience in economic engagement can wear thin if Pakistani leaders continued the path of ambiguity as far as order and justice is concerned. Certainty of punishment is the primary reason for lower crime rates in countries like China, Iran, Central Asian Republics and Middle Eastern countries. Quick institutional responses and certainty of punishment deter such crimes. Until state institutions showcase exemplary case settlement through efficient policing, quick prosecution and a justice-focused judiciary, law-breaking will increase without fear of punishment. Until the state demonstrates indiscriminate justice to all law-breakers, crime will thrive, damaging the integrity of the rule of law narratives. Narrative is abstract, but its outcomes - indiscriminate due process of justice — are not. When people see the state's top brass indulge in expedient actions that run contrary to the notion of rule of law, they stop trusting the state. Compassion, favouritism and expedience subvert law and weaken public belief in it. Common people will believe only when justice is served to victims, and violators are punished. A people-centric rights-based advocacy campaign should accompany strict punishment. Indiscriminate commitment to and execution of the rule of law facilitates state narratives on rights and justice. Exceptionalism undermines state narratives against subversive groups or non-state actors. The civil and military leadership may peddle the anti-terrorism notions or scream day and night about their commitment to the rule of law, yet not many would accord any credence as long as people at large view that rhetoric being at variance with actions on ground. The most current example of exceptionalism's bitter outcomes is the genocide of the Palestinians at the hands of Israelis who are willfully starving tens of thousands of besieged, helpless Gazans, including women and children. Few people across the globe trust the sympathetic statements that ring out of major capitals because people at large view them as Israel-abettors. Similarly, exceptionalism is accruing huge credibility costs to the Pakistani society too. The sooner this approach ends the better it may be for the integrity and credibility of the state institutions. The latest round of convictions will only further erode the state credibility and deepen the wedge between the people and the state.
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
Sadhvi Pragya, six others acquitted in deadly 2008 Malegaon bombing
An Indian court on Thursday acquitted Hindu nationalist figure and former BJP lawmaker Sadhvi Pragya Thakur, along with six others, of charges related to a 2008 bombing near a mosque in Malegaon, Maharashtra, that killed six people and injured over 100. The accused had faced terrorism and criminal conspiracy charges over the blast, which was caused by a bomb planted on a motorcycle. The high-profile trial, involving allegations of right-wing extremism, stretched on for years before concluding with Thursday's verdict. The prosecution claimed Thakur's motorbike was used to carry the explosives used in the attack, and that she took part in a key planning meeting before it was staged. However, Judge AK Lahoti ruled on Thursday that the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence against Thakur and the six others. "Judgements cannot be based on morals and public perception," Lahoti said, according to Indian legal website Live Law. Defence lawyer Ranjit Nair said the judge noted that the prosecution could not "present any proof against the accused". Indian parliamentarian Asaduddin Owaisi called the verdict "disappointing", saying those killed were "targeted for their religion". "A deliberately shoddy investigation/prosecution is responsible for the acquittal," he said in a post on X. Islam is a minority religion in Hindu-majority India, the world's most populous country. During the trial, India's counter-terrorism unit said the 2008 bombing was orchestrated to incite communal tensions, local media reported. Thakur, 55, spent nine years in jail before she was given bail in 2017. She later won an election after being fielded by the BJP to run for a seat in the central city of Bhopal. Indian election rules allow anyone to stand for office as long as they have not been convicted of a crime. Thakur courted controversy when she called the radical Hindu assassin of Indian independence hero Mahatma Gandhi a "patriot" earning her a rebuke from Prime Minister Narendra Modi. She also raised eyebrows for claiming that drinking cow urine had helped cure her cancer and extolling the benefits of drinking a concoction of milk, butter and cow dung.
Business Recorder
3 days ago
- Business Recorder
India regulator seeks trading data from exchanges in wider Jane Street probe, sources say
MUMBAI: India's markets regulator has asked stock exchanges to share detailed data of trading by U.S. brokerage Jane Street across all indexes from January 2023 to May 2025, two sources with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters, formally widening its probe into alleged market manipulation. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had on July 4 barred Jane Street from trading in Indian markets, alleging the firm manipulated stock indexes through its derivatives positions. Jane Street has since deposited $567 million in an escrow account, representing what SEBI termed 'unlawful gains,' in a bid to resume trading while reserving its legal rights. The firm has denied the allegations and called the trades basic arbitrage. The regulator's latest request, sent to exchanges on July 11, seeks mark-to-market profits, long and short positions of Jane Street group entities, and data for all expiry days of derivatives contracts, the sources said, declining to be named as the discussions are private. BSE - formerly the Bombay Stock Exchange - has been asked to share data related to its indexes of top 30 stocks and banking stocks, while National Stock Exchange of India (NSE) has been asked for information on indexes tracking the top 50 stocks and financial services firms, they added. Jane Street seeks more time to respond to Indian regulator's interim order A BSE spokesperson declined to comment. SEBI, NSE, and Jane Street did not immediately respond to Reuters' queries. 'More data is being analysed as part of a planned widening of investigations,' one of the sources said, adding that six entities under the banner are being examined currently. The letter followed a July 10 meeting where SEBI asked exchanges to look for trading patterns similar to those flagged in its interim order, the second source said. In that order, SEBI had focused on Jane Street's trades in NSE's banking index. The order said the firm had bought large quantities of stock in constituents of the Bank Nifty index, in both the cash and futures markets, during morning trade to artificially support the index, while simultaneously building large short positions in index options. The firm later reversed the trades to profit from the options, it added.
