|
A single letter
shot off by the Karnataka government to the Bilirangan
Temple Wildlife Sanctuary (brt) has brought 25,000 Soliga tribals subsisting on non timber forest produce (ntfp) to the brink of destitution. The
government notification, in adherence to the recently legislated Wild Life
(Protection) Amendment Act, 2002, has banned collection of ntfp for commercial use. More than 7,500 Soliga families, living in and around the protected area
that is also home to the infamous sandalwood smuggler Veerappan,
are now preparing for a siege to protect their rights.
The amendment to the Act was notified by the Union government in January
2003. The state government’s notice informing the various state departments
concerned came in early February 2004. Following this, deputy conservator of
forests (wildlife wing), Chamrajnagar, B K Dixit, sent a letter towards the end of February banning
the sale of ntfp
through the Large Adivasi Multipurpose Society (lamps).
|
|
|
The government
had created lamps
under the state forest department to collect and sell ntfp, besides managing other activities for
the state’s tribals.
In a reiteration of the government’s intent, a notice was sent to all the
states on July 2, 2004 by the Centrally Empowered Committee (cec) on forests set up by the Supreme Court (sc) asking all states to adhere to the
rulings of the sc
and the provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2002. The cec is empowered to ensure implementation of sc’s orders in a particular forestry case
with which many wide-ranging issues on forestry and wildlife have also been
clubbed. While the cec took a mere ‘legal’ stand, its letter has precipitated the matter as
the governments always wish to stay on the right side of an active higher
judiciary.
The earlier Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 took a different approach: it
allowed collection of ntfp from sanctuaries with the permission of the chief wildlife warden of
the state. Even then, very few chief wildlife wardens across the country had
the pluck to allow collection and sale of ntfp against the unwritten convention of the
forest bureaucracy to deny all such rights to the people (traditional or
not). In many sanctuaries, the collection continued unabated, though
illegally.
But brt
was an exception. It has been perhaps the biggest and the best experiment in
sustainable use of ntfp — something that the revised 1988 forest policy of the country also
promotes. brt
is one of the few sanctuaries where the extraction of ntfp has not only been systematically run but
also closely monitored for a decade by the forest department, ecologists, non governmental organisations
into conservation as well as groups engaged in rural development in the
region. It is arguably the country’s only sanctuary for which all the
observing groups unanimously agree that the collection of ntfp is a sustainable source of livelihood for
the tribals.
Tilling
with fingers
Spread over 540-square kilometres, brt lies between the Eastern and the Western Ghats. The Soligas
migrated from the Nilgiris centuries ago and
settled here, says Dixit. Once the area was
declared a sanctuary under the Act, they were ‘allowed’ to practice shifting
cultivation and were engaged as labour in various
forestry operations and plantations. Primarily a hunting-gathering tribe at
the time, the Soligas gave up hunting but continued
to gather forest produce, including honey and lichen.
|
|
|
Today, some of the Soligas live inside brt in nine podus
(hamlets) with not more than an acre per family (that too, not for all
families) to practice subsistence agriculture. The rest of them are settled
on brt’s periphery in 48 podus.
They avoid ploughing the land mechanically and
resist using fertilisers or weeding of land. In
case of at least one podu — Mondkainatha — ploughing is
done with the fingers after the rains. The old belief of not tilling “Mother
Earth” holds strong while they continue to worship their tree god “Doda Sampige”. They mainly grow
ragi and coarse cereals. In this era of
market economy and vast food banks, Soligas still
do not like to store grain and depend upon income from the gathering of
forest produce for nearly nine months.
lamps regulates the collection
of the forest produce, purchases the produce at fixed rates and then auctions
it off. Before the lamps was created, the tribals
used to sell the produce at a pittance to a city contractor who had bagged
the rights for collection from the forest department. Over the last eight
years, the arrangement with lamps has developed into a systematic process with the involvement of
two non-governmental organisations: Vivekananda Girijana Kalyan Kendra (vgkk) and Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment (atree).
|
|
|
vgkk has been organising the tribals into
self-help groups, and ensuring value addition of ntfp such as
packaging honey into bottles. atree has been monitoring the impact of ntfp extraction on
forest health as well as working with the tribals
to develop a participatory self-monitoring mechanism.
|
Ecological
business
Forest produce collection has been a
sustainable activity
|
|
Name
of produce
|
Quantity collected in two
divisions out of three
|
Average per year
|
Quantity per ha per year
|
|
2000-01
|
2001-02
|
2002-03
|
|
Gooseberry
|
134,034
|
666,891
|
137,447
|
31,790
|
9.74
|
|
Lichen
|
21,515
|
7,815
|
45,658
|
24,996
|
0.77
|
|
Honey
|
6,983
|
16,193
|
19,406
|
14,194
|
0.442
|
|
Note: all figures in kilogramme; ha = hectare
Total Forest Area of Collection of these two societies = 32100.834
hectares
|
|
Says Venkat
of vgkk, “It’s taken us two decades to set up this entire
infrastructure. Now we have a secondary high school for the Soligas, a primary health centre and a honey-processing
factory; we provide alternative employment through other vocational
activities. In the last two years, we have in fact ploughed back profits to
the community from our activities. And now all this will come to an end? What
is the logic of such a decision? What alternatives do the people have?”
Siddapa Shetty, an
ecologist who has been carrying out research in brt for the past
eight years adds, “We have monitored their extraction of honey as well as amla for the past eight years. But let’s be clear,
we didn’t have to come and teach them what is sustainable harvest and what is
not. They are very selective and systematic about how they go about
collecting lichen, amla as well as honey. It
is not a random and certainly not a rampant exploitation. Our studies show
that they harvest only 29 per cent of the fruits of P emblica
(one of the two varieties of amla) each year
and only 60 per cent of the fruits of P indofischeri
(the other variety). The percentage of overall collection of fruits in brt is low and does
not seem to have a negative impact on regeneration of the fruiting trees (one
measure of sustainability of extraction).” In fact, says Shetty,
studies show that the Soligas of brt are far more
advanced in their collection practices than the tribals
in some of the other forested regions of the Western Ghats.
Harvesters or
robbers?
C Madagowda, a Soliga who
studied in the vgkk school, went on to do his Masters in Social Work at a regional
university and now has come back to work for atree, is indignant: “What will my people
do? What are the options before them? Even before we have been apprehensive
of being shunted out because the forest department wanted to declare this a
Project Tiger area, a pre-requisite to which is that all tribals
move out of the sanctuary.” He points to the irrational provision of the ban
that extraction can only be for personal consumption. “Now are we supposed to
eat 10 kgs of honey and five kgs
of amla each day for three months and live
on nothing for the rest nine to qualify as extracting for personal use? Let
those who make such laws in Delhi show us
how to do so.”
Dixit has tried in his own way to help the tribals. He has played a legal manoeuvre
by saying in a letter to the forest department that the extraction is not
commercial but only for sustenance as the tribals
do not make profits but only get wages for collecting ntfp. The state
government is taking its time mulling over Dixit’s
interpretation.
But is the future of the 25,000 people supposed to remain tied to legalese,
or are the Union and the state governments going to follow scientific proof
instead of a narrow interpretation of an irrational law? Madagowda
says, “We cannot sit too long and wait for things to precipitate. We will hit
the streets of Chamrajnagar and Bangalore if the
government refuses to listen to us just because we do not make up a
substantial vote bank.” Is this wildlife sanctuary too going the way that
dozens others have — become battlegrounds for rights ?
|
|